Kroisos vs Doryphoros
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.
The first glance you’ve taken at those two statues, you just see a man standing there. They are not doing anything in particular, just standing there. That was only in the first glance of course. Now take a good look at each one. In the archaic Greek kouros figure, the pose of the figure is very frontal. The entire figure is relatively stiff with the exception of the left leg, which is in front of the body giving it the early contrapposto pose. Even though it does have a much more natural pose to it with the one leg out, the rest of the body is not in a pose as if the weight of the body was put into one leg. The head is stiff with the hair being geometric and with the hair falling back on the body. The physical stature of the body is moderately realistic. The muscles are not quite as well defined but they are still semi-realistic. They are portrayed as if they were tense. The arms are also at the side.
In the other figure, Doryphoros, there seems to be much more expression. The contrapposto pose is very realistic. The weight is shifted all throughout the body. Arms are not stiff at the sides, but one is relaxed while the other is at a forty-five degree angle from the elbow. There is tension in the calf from the leg, which is being raised up. The torso is also somewhat at an angle because of the hips. The head is not frontal, but at an angle. The muscles are very defined but very relaxed. The hair is not naturally flowing, but not geometric.
The emotion in the figures is also very different. In the archaic figure, the face contains emotion other than the archaic smile. The eyes are closed with no facial expression. The classical statue on the other hand does not have any facial expressions but has open eyes and no smile.
The Statue of a kouros represents a Greek male. With one foot forward, the statue at the same time, represents movement and is able to stand on it own. This also gives the over life size figure, visible weight. In this early figure, geometric forms seem to predominate, and anatomical details, such as the chest muscles and pelvic arch, are presented with somewhat of exaggerated lines. Although the exaggerated lines show where these muscles belong, the detail is still missing. Looking up and down this nude body, at this miss proportioned and lacking of detail body, the hair is what grabs my attention. The hair is carved with detail not noticeable in the rest of the body. As well, although the fists are clinched and still bonded to the body, the legs and elbows are separated. The ability to move around and inspect the statue makes a big difference than if it was up against a wall, or just looking at its picture. The legs, which support the weight of the statue, have a visible strength which is seen in the knees. The head is what carried the most detail, the ears although to far back, are intricately designed. It is the ability to walk around the entire statue that allows me to see the different aspects and places where attention to detail was placed. However, he does not expand into three dimensional space; he has a closed-off, column-like appearance
Cellular South Inc. d.b.a C Spire Wireless with its headquarters at Ridgeland, Mississippi is the eight largest wireless provider in the United States [3]. It is owned by the holding company Telapex, Inc., and has approximately 900,000 customers in Mississippi, the Memphis Metropolitan Area, the Florida Panhandle, parts of Alabama including Mobile, and Rome, Georgia [3]. It began its wireless service on February 4th, 1988 on the Mississippi Gulf Coast using AMPS technology [3]. It is the first wireless provider in the U.S. “to personalize customers’ experience by offering apps that fit who they are, services that anticipate their needs, and rewards for using their phone in new ways – all with seamless ease and at amazingly fast speeds (as stated in [1] [10]).” C Spire Wireless is one of the small service providers that decided to launch 4G LTE service in its target market using its 1.9GHz spectrum holdings and forged a LTE roaming agreement with Sprint Nextel thanks to them rolling out the LTE using their G – Band, 1.9GHz spectrum [7].
I think that The Statue of Asklepios has more realism than the Torso of a God. It just shows more of naturalistic body
Doryphoros by Polykleitos was originally a Greek bronze made around 450-40B.C. The only way we can see it today is through the Roman marble copies (which is common of many Greek statues.) Some supports had to be added for the change in material, resulting in the addition of the form resembling a tree trunk, the support on the left foot, and the small bar bridging the gap between his right wrist and hip. Doryphoros was originally holding a spear in his left hand; appropriate, given that his name means, literally, “spear-bearer.” The sculpture is a well-known and early example of classical Greek contrapposto (the shifting of weight onto one leg and off-axis shoulders and arms.) One leg nearly appears to be lifting off the ground, giving the effect of movement. The perceived weight shift adds more dynamism to the piece, and contributes to the realism of the figure. The resulting slight “s-curve” of the figure is true to what we might see in life, and reflects an interest in proportion and anatomy, as seen with many Greek sculptures of the age. This is made particularly clear in the defined muscle groups of the figure and attention to details such as the structure of the knees, hands, and feet. Polykleitos sculpted many athletic male bodies in the nature of his personal aesthetic canon, which we can see exemplified here through the intense attention to the mathematics of the human body. The contours of the figure are visually interesting and although the figure does not hold much facial expression, his body language and presence speak volumes of his existence as the epitome of masculinity.
Let’s begin with what was going on during the time period for each sculpture. During the 2458-2446 BCE. Userkaf was thriving over his brother Sahure, and he became the new ruler of Egypt. In the start of 2446 BCE, Neferirkare beings his dominant over Egypt. King Sahure and Nome God is a high relief it is still attached to a surface of a stone. The Pharaoh sitting on his thorn wearing a Nemes headdress (it is usually blue and gold striped), fake beard. The king has an emotionless facial expression. It was made for a decoration for the king pyramid complex. The symbol behind this statue could be the gathering of the Nome gods form Upper and Lower Egypt around t...
To conclude, both sculptures do not have much in common, but it is obvious that the artists had knowledge in human anatomy and was able to sculpt them spectacularly. It is also obvious the break from somewhat idealistic to realistic human nature. The change is so drastic that one might not believe that both sculptures come from the same Greece because it is so well-known for its astonishing artworks found in temples, building, etc.
Both figures are in a very traditional, standing pose for the time period in which they were created. The sculpture of Augustus is based on the Greek classical statue of the Spear Bearer or Doryphoros by Polykleitos. He is standing in contrapposto, a very classical standing pose wherein the weight of the body is shifted naturally so the figure’s weight is more on one leg, with the other leg slightly bent behind and the hips tilted. Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II are both in the standard Egyptian canon standing pose, in which the figures are rigidly frontal with the pharaoh’s arms down at his sides and fists clenched. Like Augustus, one leg is slightly ahead and one is behind, but there is no contrapposto, the figure’s weight is shared equally by both legs and the hips are squared and level.
... still popular today. Hemmingway was thought to be the leading literary figure of his decade. The people of this time enjoyed this literature because they could relate to the distrust in what used to be their moral guideposts, and they felt the need to go against the conformity and materialism as well.
The Colossal Statue of King Tuthankhamun and the Lamassu are amazing works of art. Of the eight works assigned, these two particularly caught my eye. The two pieces, though very different, have many similarities. In this paper, I will discuss these similarities and differences of style in terms of their overall shape, proportions, and individual parts.
I’m also intrigued by how almost all their organs are placed inside their heads, it’s very interesting how octopi can fit through practically any hole but have so many body parts gathered in one place.
Here, we will be looking at a rendition of the high marble statue of Augustus Caesar known as “Augustus of Prima Porta.” Originating from 1st Century A.D., it is said that there is a possibility that the original sculpture could have been of greek descent. Upon a general overview of the sculpture, one can see that Augustus fulfils a millitarial role of some kind. From his very stance to the garments portrayed on him, Augustus is draped in a decorative cuirass and a tunic, accompanied by a figure of Cupid clutching on to his right calf. After taking the general themes of the work into account, one can then began to start unraveling the many symbolic elements embedded into the sculpture that allude to godly themes. Starting from the crown of his head, the very chiselment and structure of his face gives the work a youthful element to it, even though some say that Augustus was around 40 years old. A recurring theme within Greek and Roman culture is the matter of godliness and immortality amongst idolized figures themselves. This idea is usually depicted by displaying powerful human being in a younger light. This
a shift can be seen from idealized and nearly perfect sculptures to sculptures that had a natural and real feel to them. These newer statues were sculpted with the notion of Realism weighing more than the concept of Idealism. The subjects’ body was not in a state of military attention, they were placed in a more natural, yet still graceful position. Realistic sculptures also did not embellish the muscular physique of the subject; the muscle definition was displayed more subtly and naturally. The weight of Realistic statues is not distributed in a balanced, geometric fashion like the Ideal statues. The Realistic statues balance their weight just as a real person would in motion which gives the sculpture a more graceful and natural
The beginning of this short research essay began with the author explaining what the essay will be about. This essay primarily focuses on the differences and similarities of sexuality between men, women, gays, and lesbians. It also focuses on time, because throughout time, human sexuality has changed. New scientific evidence has also helped give new insight to the human mind and their most basic needs.
The Romans on the other hand tended to strive more towards realism in sculpture. Men and women were sculpted in poses they would have been in naturally. For example the sculptures on the frieze of Ara Pacis Augustae illustrate a procession of Romans, all of whom are depicted fully clothed and probably as they would have looked like in real life. There are however a few Roman sculptures that lean toward the ideal. For, example the statue of Augustus of Primaporta. The statue depicts Emperor Augustus in his most ideal form with “a broad cranium, deep-set eyes, and sharp ridges in his brow, a well-formed mouth and a small chin. Furthermore, his face depicted in the manner of Apollo was meant to associate Augustus’ abilities with those of the powerful god” ("Augustus of Prima Porta").
... decades ago. This book is one that will allow the reader to view many aspects of sexuality from a social standpoint, and apply it to certain social attitudes in our society today, these attitudes can range from the acceptance of lesbian and gays, and the common sight of sex before marriage and women equality. The new era of sexuality has taken a definite "transformation" as Giddens puts it, and as a society we are living in the world of change in which we must adapt, by accepting our society as a changing society, and not be naive and think all the rules of sexuality from our parents time our still in existence now.