Pacing through more exhibits, I was glad that there were some variety in this next gallery. As I walked into the light beige room, I was aware of the following nearly all black and white painting, which absolutely struck me. Indeed, through many years of observing art, it never occurred to me that it was possible for paintings to be black and white. Though technically, the following painting isn't actually black and white, with some hints of red at the sculptures on the left side of the painting - the large majority of it remains black and white. To see this remarkable style certainly was a breath of fresh air after gazing at the numerous colored oil paintings.
Getting into the specifics, I realize how strange it is to see a black and white painting - especially if it was framed like this. Supposedly it was possible to draw on a canvas this large, and then frame it, it would certainly be odd because of the artistic convention to not frame drawings. Therefore, since black and white is frequently associated with drawings, seeing the golden frame around this painting assures me that indeed I was looking at a painting and not a drawing. If anything, paintings enable artists to really create superior lighting - such insane amounts of shading is entirely unpractical using the thin tip of a pencil. I believe that this painting represent a man losing consciousness as he come to contact with an angel, represented by the cherubic babies with the rays of god shining down on the man. Unlike some divine witness artworks, the man is accompanied by a witnesses, who are represented as proportionally shorter men with different skin colors. This distinct difference in scale is odd because such hierarchic scale hasn't been widely practiced since the days of Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Like half of European paintings, this one does not have a discrete background - instead showing a dark background that can only meant to represent the darkened interior of an abandoned building. Or, as I theorize that pre-industrial buildings often lack in interior light because of a lack of light-bulbs and insufficient clerestories.
Imagine my surprise to see a marble sculpture in frontal deep relief right after viewing the "black and white" painting from above. Given the European context, I drew instant parallels to Greco-Roman aesthetics not only because of the material and color, but also the proportions and facial features certainly indicate an obsession with the human form similar to Hellenistic tastes. However, it is unlike Greco-Roman to create such a deep relief with a protruding z axis plane - such artwork was ornamental and required disproportionate amount of marble to create the scene - especially if it was life-sized. However, by far the most striking aspect of this entire marble relief is the instant shot of deja vu - this marble relief is depicting the same exact scene as the painting above. Without looking at the label (it's too small to read), I conjecture that this marble is modeled after the painting in this chicken and egg scenario because black and white paintings are rare and disagree with painting conventions during this period - black and white paintings cannot be spontaneous. By basing the subject matter over the marble sculpture, it acquires a sense of legitimacy that otherwise would not be bestowed upon. In addition, the lack of color in the painting indicates that the original sculpture had no color or that the painter simply wanted to stay true to the source material. The 3D projection of this relief sculpture really enhances the concept of negative space and allows a greater emphasis on the main subject despite the monotone color. Indeed, I think it's easier to make out the cherubs in this sculpture than the painting. I must admit that seeing those two artworks together was really fascinating as it allows a more direct comparison when using the same scene.
If I learned anything from the previous sculpture, it was that the trend in this gallery appears to be based around Greco-Roman motifs. Knowing what ancient Greek vases and amphora looked like, it is immediately obvious at first glance that this vase copied the general form of Greek amphora, but coated with gold and inlaid with depictions of pink flowers...in color. Ancient Greek amphora only utilized two different forms of coloring - red figure and black figure. There was no gold figure with pretty pink flowers, so it was pretty clear not only from the content but also from how immaculate it looks. This vase appears particularly ageless - it was hard to believe it was hundreds of years old. From the gold (or gilded) construction, the intended purpose of this vase was clearly for ornamental purposes, though the handles on the sides enabled some degree of safe mobility and transport. If anything, a vase like this likely shows what such pieces looked like when it as first produced, offering insight into how it may have looked inside a Renaissance house. However, unlike vases in places like ancient China, this vase was clearly meant to decorate a wealthy patron's residence, not in cultural places like temples. This meant that the vase had no other contextual importance - was a Greek inspired vase with gold and flowers made to decorate a house. It wasn't meant as a offering vessel for any deities. For these reasons, I took immense pleasure in observing this particular vessel for it's relative importance and aesthetic merit.
Some Western artworks like to portray contemporary or foreign characters and events in a very Hellenistic manner - such as the Judith beheading Holofernes, which took place in ancient Assyria. In that particular painting, both Judith and Holofernes were decidedly Westernized and dressed in Greco-Roman fashion. Sometimes if may become difficult for the uninitiated to discern the difference between a painting depicting an anachronism or authentic Greco-Roman events. Which brings me to this painting. The striking features of the Roman toga are clearly visible in this painting and the female stola is also present in this scene. In this scene, there are clues that indicate that this was a piece meant to portray Roman lifestyle. For one thing, women in stola are rarely shown at all in Christian paintings and sometimes, not at all. Also, despite the inaccurate color choices, no signs of divinity could be discerned from this image as well as the absence of Jesus in the painting. Finally, the two men shown here show some very archetypal Roman facial features and hairstyle - indicating further that this painting is more historically accurate. Even still, it remains unclear where in the Roman Empire this painting took place in, thanks to dark background painting conventions. Finally, of note is to notice that both this and the black and white paintings show unrealistic lighting. For example, even though it was implied that cherubs was casting the light from heaven - the background was completely dark. Likewise, this painting looks as if somebody cast a spotlight on these people to illuminate their physical appearance. This may be a mechanism devised to painters to circumvent the traditional lack of ambient light in Ancient societies while showing enough details to convey a story or idea.
So far, I must say that this exhibit was by far one of the most memorable ones that I've had the privilege of strolling through as it nicely delineate several key artistic concepts and movements. I don't know if the museum intentionally structured it or not, but this exhibit was what I call a real breath of fresh air compared to the relative uniformity of previous European exhibits.
No comments:
Post a Comment