Classical Sculpture of the Greeks: a Journal Review.

Article refreshen What is classicalal Sculpture by Walter R. Agard Jakob Mattern HUM 2220, prof. Warner Ph. D. Th, 600pm-845pm Word Count 1102 The word unmixed use to describe modal values of music, painting, sculpture, architecture, and hitherto manufactured consumer goods. If of all time there was a period in art or manufacturing that stands step to the fore with even balance, subtle gravitas, and general excellence, it will about likely be described as classical, which after all, is no easy feat, considering that anything to confront the classical name is decidedly, in near way or a nonher, The best of the best. concord to Walter R. Agard however, the word has lost well-nigh of its gusto. He states that it is so overused that it no longer describes whether or non manything is in-fact excellent, but rather, if a persona fits into a time frame and localization of consort that suggests that it most likely is. Just as all cars produced between 1900 and 1972 in the St ates are non necessarily classics, not all plunk of art created in the broad history of Greeks should be considered a true(a) classic.Rather, Agard places forth his guidelines and examples of what should classify ancient Greek art, sculpture in particular, as the best of its time. The exposit of Agards argument tarry upon the structured guidelines he lays out in the beginning of his article that to be classical, a Greek sculpture moldiness befool The initial cin one casept of a muscular kind-hearted mixture. The synthesis of naturalism and clear de first-rated, relatively simple initiation. The amplification of subjective planes.Refinement of detail. He to a fault suggests that classical style sculpture took prominence between the geezerhood 500 BCE and 420 BCE, thus dismissing some of the ahead geometric style sculpture, as rise up as the later much expressionist and complicated Hellenistic sculpture. He states that fleck some later sculptures may be more magnif icent to behold, they are not embodying that which makes something a classic, and that they are not fulfilling the record of the aterials or the monumental purpose of sculpture. marble is not a soft substance, and thus, the shapes created out of its dense compocertain(p) mustiness exist suit, according to Agard. age the charge of fine detail are very necessary, he states that the overall action of the piece must be graceful, direct, imposing, and strong the sculpture must follow the ancient Greek adage, fare thy self to be a classic, it must appear just as virile and eternal as the marble itself.This attribute is found in the many sculptures that he analyzes in his article the weight strength Hermes, the tower-like Apollo, and the tensioned Heracles all display a alert strength that compliment the nature of the marble. Agard in addition places a great deal of impressiveness on the healthy human prepare, and the presence of subtle naturalism show by means of fine de tails. In every piece defined classic by Agard, we figure a being that, while possessing a basic and strong geometric base, is in addition defined by many smaller details that synthesize simple design with an persuasionlistic human form.The curls in Hermes whiskers and hair, the subtle veins and ligaments of the Charioteers hands and feet, the calm and surefooted gaze of Apollo, and the bulging muscular details found on the statues of the bow wielding Heracles and the lightning lobbing genus Zeus all add a life-like member to the otherwise cold geometric shapes, and process to portray all(prenominal) character as a healthy and idealistic human being in both point and body.For his closing statement, Agard mentions an encounter he erstwhile had with a tourist who was frustrated with how sure of themselves the classic Greek statues seem to be. He then refutes that they have the right to do so, simply because of the rich value and dignity confined in their strong and noble bo dies, and that it was this spirit that make these statues honest and true classics of the ancient world. As a whole, I do agree with Agard in his viewpoints and conclusions of what a true classic should consist of.Referring once more to automobiles, it is my view that for a car to be classic it must immingle simple design with beautiful details while still fulfilling the function for which it was designed with full effect. With respect to Agards definitions, the formula of classic sculpture should not be far from such ideals. I thought that Agards resemblance towards the nobility and strength of the designs was well founded, because although a statue is undoubtedly a work of art, it is also a permanent public loudspeaker of a citys people.These strong and idealistic statues may very well have served as an ego-booster for the ancient Greeks their solid forms and endless apprehension meant to personify the people dwelling in the polis itself. If anything however, it was this ego that catapulted these ancient people to such great heights in impairment of sophistication and achievement, so while some later sculptures may have captured more emotion or better expressed the human condition, it was the dignified, strong, and direct sculptures from 500-420 BCE that best bodied the golden age of Greece.There were a hardly a(prenominal) points with which I disagree however. The selection of the Statue of Hermes, firstly. Although it is a good combination of geometric drive balance and fine detail, I felt up that over all it was simply not naturalistic enough to be considered a perfect synthesis of the human form and simple design. It is an impressive statue none-the-less, but it seemed a bit rudimentary compared with the other examples, a bit too two dimensional.Another idea with which I dont completely agree is the categorization of two dimensional friezes with linear backdrops as the only true classical form of the frieze. Once again, It seemed to me that a frieze with a more shallow appearance did not admit with some of the other mentioned sculptures bursting with depth and life. While the drapery of the frieze depicting Heracles and Athena was beyond impressive, the naturalism of the characters themselves did not seem to arena the same heights as some of the other pieces.In any matter however, I believe that Agard compiled an excellent definition of what a classic statue should be defined as, what it should personify, and what its function should be, compared with the common ideal that nearly every statue from ancient Greece should be considered classical. His analysis of each sculpture was extremely thorough, and as a whole, his article gave some insight into what but these ancient artisans may have been thought of when they shaped these masterpieces. Bibliography Agard, Walter R. What Is Classical Sculpture? The Classic Journal, Vol. 49, No. 8 (May, 1954) pp. 341-349. Print.