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.
In this paper I am exploring “Portrait of Augustus as general” and “Khafre enthroned”. From exploring and getting to know the Statues in my Art History Book I have compared these statues (Kleiner, 2013). The first and most obvious similarity between the two is in the artists’ idealization and immortalization of their subjects. Both Khafre and Augustus are portrayed in an idealized manner, designed to give the impression of nobility, timelessness, and divinity. The two statues were the political advertisements of their times that showed the public images of reliable leaders who one
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.
The Statue of a kouros and the Portrait statue of a boy both depict similar subjects, however are greatly different in how they accomplish this task. Through detail, or lack there of, the Greeks and Romans are able to display a certain value they have in its members. These two statues were made about 500 years apart and approach the sculpting process quit differently. The Greek statue seems to use geometric exaggerated lines to form the body while the Romans use a more realistic approach and sculpt the body with a more rounded finish. Statue of a kouros, from about 590 B.C and Portrait of a boy, from about the first century, do not share any great technical aspects and are basically nothing alike.
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.
In terms of head and neck features, the figures seem to be most distant. While the Apollo statue has a large smile on his face, the Metele has an expression of stern seriousness. The Apollo statue has no more facial detail than cheekbones roughly instilled. The Metele shows complete understanding of the human muscle and bone structure in the face.
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 chose this sculpture because I was intrigued by the position of the man and the centaur. I was able to witness that the centaur is trying to invade the personal space of the man. The sculpture showed me that there is a strong relationship between man and creature. The quality of the sculpture made me realize that animals play a big part of a human’s life and can be seen as threatening to humans. It was interesting to see that both the man and centaur were created to have almost of the same structures. This statue has a metallic brown and green, bronze tone and appeared undersized. It has a height of four and a half feet, and six inches. It has long, thin, legs with calf muscles, and bulging thighs. The sculpture evolved from Olympia, Greece. The man and centaur sculpture was created in 750 BCE during an orderly time period. The colors used for this sculpture, proved that it has a longer lasting mold for statues. On the left side of the sculpture, the man has a wrap on his head, that can symbolize, he is some form of a god. On the right side, the centaur has the same head piece as the man, but the body of a horse. It can be seen that the man and
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...
... 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 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.
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
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.
... 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.
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").