Don't really know where those lines all came from, my bad. But I really like the Gothic architecture so far because I think the innovation of the flying buttresses are really unique to architecture. Also, the stained glass windows (especially the rose windows)are beautiful.
I prefer the hellenistic sculptures of the Greeks as opposed to the Romanesque because they're more realistic, however, I like the architecture of the romanesque period like the buttresses and the stained glass windows (like Taylor).
Nice topic, Taylor.As far as art itself is concerned, I am definitely in favor of Hellenic/Hellenistic/Romanistic art. Their sculpture was chillingly accurate, lovely and beautiful. The flat pieces of the middle ages, especially in tapestry and painting, cannot compare, although there is something stylistically appealing about Gislebertus' Burtonesque tympanum sculptures. With architecture I am far more conflicted. I love the grand temples of ancient Greece and the imposing public works of the Roman Empire. The seem to radiate an aura of divine knowledge, justice, and elegant grandeur. Their styles remain iconic in our culture (and I'm sure that's the reason I feel about them the way I do). However, I am also enchanted by Gothic architecture (though not so much Romanesque); it is fanciful and ornate, lovely, warm, and rather inspiring. Whereas Greco-Roman architecture is grounded in this world (though it aspires to ideals, I still feel as though those are secular--I use this word quite deliberately--ones), Gothic feels entirely ethereal, as if the buildings themselves are of another realm. Both are feelings I appreciate-- like apples and oranges, I cannot choose one always over another. Rather, I enjoy each when in a particular mood.In conclusion, good college campuses should possess both styles... (ahem, YALE).
ROMANEQUE FAIL!!! n000000000bz
I favor the early Greek art over the Romanesque art. I prefer the detailed statues over the cartoon like figures of the Romanesque period. i also like the building structure that the greeks built instead of the gothic style churches, because it seems like the romanesque period is all churches.
I like Hellenistic sculptures - they show emotion and are very detailed, especially with regards to motion. Yeah, Gothic Cathedrals are pretty (men in the class, please forgive me for using that word), but I don't think they're any prettier than the Parthenon or the Pantheon.
I agree with many of the people who have commented already that in that I prefer the Greek art and even cultural ideals much more than those of the Romaneque. The Greek spents effort trying to reach a level of perfection through study and dedication, while early Christians were more focued on portraying the virtuous life of Christ.
Yes, I'm aware of the spelling fail and have been all day but I CAN'T BLOG AT SCHOOL! I didn't realize how much I liked Hellenistic/Hellenic sculptures until we started looking at the early Christian empire. They are so much more naturalistic and are actually carved in the round. When comparing architecture, like I previously stated, I strongly favor Gothic for its beauty, although the Roman architecture was highly innovative. And stephen brings up a good point with the differences between the motives of Greek and Romanesque art.
"And stephen brings up a good point"PROPER CAPITALIZATION FAIL!!!!!!
Just so you guys know, Gothic and Romanesque aren't the same...
I know this wasn't one of the options, technically, but I also really like Gothic architecture. I think the buttresses (particularly of the flying variety) look extremely ornate and impressive. I also like the noticible deviation from symmetry, as the Chartres cathedral almost looks whimsical with its regard to symmetry. The stained glass windows also add a certain depth of artistic innovation, as I'm sure these interacted to some degree with the wide nave and lighter columns.
GREATEST CLASS EVER!
One thing I don't like about the churches of the romanesque period is that they're so dark inside. I would like them alot better if they didn't feel so gloomy.
I didn't like much of the early christian churches that we have studied so far, howecer, the paintings that we looked at today by Giotto represented an interesting aspect of christian art. Giotto seems to have began implementing foreground and a more elaborate background that had never been seen before even in Greek art. This innovaton is not consistent with the commonly held notions of the "Dark" ages.
Yeah - Giotto was relatively ballin
I feel like this thread needs to be Greek verse Early Christian, because I actually prefer The gothic architecture of the early Christians to both of these groups. It is odd that the architecture is so beautiful and advanced and the art is completely behind that of the Greeks. Gothic architecture is amazing in its detail and the longevity of the structures.
i don't really find one superior over the other. i think the greeks did a great job of portraying the perfect human form. i think that the cartoony aspects of the romanesque art keep the focus on the religious figures themselves and not their detailed muscles or robe folds.
I think that is true about the cartoony aspects of early Christian art. The lack of individual characteristics like that of the Hellenic art represents the Christians point of view that indivduals were not important except in their obedience to the one high God. Because of this, I think the Hellenic situational art is much for interesting and leaves more room for artistic expression.
The architecture is improving, in my opinion, as time keeps unraveling. The paintings though seem in the beggining as if anyone could draw/create them because they look childish and not very profesional. So, I think Jane and Steven are right about the paintings not focusing on the apperance so people, the viewers would also focus on the spiritual. I don't think the artists even considered later centuries would view the paintings. Rather, they were just trying to get the message across to everyone at that specific time. I guess people then didn't care about the beauty.
I think the churches were so elaborate because people needed to keep in mind that the house of God was in fact superior. God was the ruler and everyone was going to go back to him. The place for worship was then a bigger focus than painting and tapestries because in the churches people would pray and repent. Therefore, they needed to feel insignificant and awed in order to actually believe in the power and magnificence of God.
I prefer greek, i feel like the ideals they portrayed through it took a lot of time and effort.
I like Greek architecture better - Romanesque and Gothic structures are really ornate and impressive, but they're all cold and sharp-looking and stuff. I always feel like I'm not welcome when I visit fancy Gothic buildings.The towering white columns and arches of Greek architecture, on the other hand, make me feel like a Spartan soldier-philosopher-monster. And as that's pretty much what I am, I take a liking to that.
i perfer greek art because the romanesque art lacks natralism. that lack of porportion and awkward composition has always bothered me...along with the fact that it is religious art
UM Nussdorf i didnt know you were an atheist.... those comments are getting old. i get its not your religion, but that doesnt make it any less artful. the Greeks sculpted there gods too, but you didn't comment on that, just jesus...
An interesting difference between Greek and Romaneque architecture is the purpose that it served for the local community. The Romans built aquaducts to clean and expand the city of Rome and the Collosseum to entertain the masses and increase the popularity of the emperor. Romanesque architecture was built to serve the community in their religious life in building churches.
I disagree with the comment about christian art not focusing on specific people. Hellinic art was completely uncharacteristic, ther are no specific aspects at all about people. Christian is all about mary jesus and God so I think it is the exact opposite.
i think that flying buttresses and stained glass windows are absolutely amazing. i still remember how awed I was by the national cathedral in d.c. So, even though I am actaully referring more to gothic trademarks, I still think that the architecture of the middle ages was amzaing, just like that of the greeks.
Even though, i previously said i prefer Greek art, i think some of the Romanesque art is incredible. their use of gold and ornate materials creates an incredible feeling inside their archetecture. They were all just so bright and "heavenly" that it was a very unique and impressive style
I used to think that the Greek art was much better but after researching for my paper for Dr. Mooney and study for our art test i began to favor the art of the romanesque period much more. After looking at the construction that went into these churches it is truly impresseive.
I like it all. The Greeks/Romans for their amazing naturalism and ability to convey human sentiment as well as their innovation. Where would we be without arches?The Romanesque, I like, because it makes me laugh a bit some times, especially the Bayeux Tapestry. They also honorably contributed to the evolution of architecture. Without the Romanesque, you couldn't have gotten the much favored Gothic. Not a big fan of the Romanesque architecture though. Early churches feel thick and cramped.The Gothic I love too. It's absolutely astounding. I love Gothic architecture the most. I was struck speechless and actually barely kept myself from bursting into tears at the cathedral in D.C. The effect is very effective, though I do feel a tad manipulated now.
Post a Comment