I don't really know what this group it for. Therefore, I'm going to talk about the art we've been looking at. I don't find the Neoclassical/ Romantic artwork particularly interesting. While I this it's interesting how the artists include elements from the Classical period,I just don't feel like there is as much to these paintings as ones from periods such as the Baroque. And although Doc does not find it very appealing, I really liked the George Washington statue! I do think it is interesting, however, how in certain paintings figures represent things (such as the figure representing liberty in "Liberty Leading the People"). I'm hoping this is what we're supposed to be talking about. If not... oh well.
I really did not like the George Washington statue. There was nothing original about it. My favorite was the guy on the rocks in front of the ocean (I forgot the name of it). I think it really portrays the beausty of nature especially since it doesn't focus on the man in the photo.BTW I don't think this blog was supposed to be about art.
i am not as much a fan of this movement, for some reason i still think the renaissance was the most unique. i do love the liberty leading the people because it is infused with such energy of the time, something not seen before.
I think we can see remnants of the Enlightenment in our world today. It was, in a sense, a revolution almost as great as the Renaissance. That's a bold statement that I have absolutely no qualification to make, but roll with me here. It might even be seen as an extension of the Renaissance. During the enlightenment, people--society-- finally dared to cast off the mode of thought that had restricted them for so long, much of it, if not all of it, associated with religion. They began to think of free governments, of sciences that conflicted with what the church then decreed (let it be known that I am not saying that science and religion cannot coexist today, but in that era, they were antithetical). With new scientific discoveries they became aware of the rational mind's potential-- a potential previously unknown to them, unconsidered because it could not be explored under their previous paradigm; the shadow of the church and its strict institutional thinking allowed no light to be shed on it. They began to explore their world systematically and with enthusiasm, to consider ideas outside the norm, to cast off all previous assumptions. We have inherited this mode of thought, this idea of scientists marching as one toward a goal, each clearing small spaces for others to explore after them-- a legacy of science. We live in that free-thinking era with those concepts they first dared to recover or create. In a previous post, I pondered where Turner found the influence to paint a more abstract piece-- perhaps it was the free-thinking spirit of the Enlightenment, or at least, the spirit that allowed the Romantic movement to glide in.
But Dean, this era was highly unique because of the ideas of progress and the power of reason to solve all and any problems that can be posed to humanity. The Enlightenment was the first major time-period where god and religion were rejected or at least questioned. That occurance never happened in the Renaissance, but Reason and Progress allowed that to happen. Out of the Enlightenment came the most influencial political-economic theory: Communism. Thus, the Enlightenment was vital to the shape of the following eras.
i really like the george washington statue too. it exemplifies an original piece based on classical elements. i'm not really fond of most of the other neoclassical/romantic artworks. i do like the train one, though.
i agree with everyone about the George Washington statue, although it was well done, there was nothing new about it, and it just seemed like a boring piece to me. The greek and Roman statues were so much more elaborate and really draws the views in to the whole seen. Yet the George Washington statue does not really draw you in like the intense emotion of the Greek statues did
Post a Comment