Essay
3
Essay
# 4C
Title:
Mother Earth,
Fertility, Love and more?
 |
| Venus De Milo |
 |
| Venus of Willendorf |
Question:
Describe
the functional purpose of the Venus
of Willendorf and the Venus De Milo. How is their imagery similar?
How is it different? Find a third Venus example to compare and
contrast these two to and describe why you selected it.
Summary:
Overall
I understand both the Venus of Willendorf and the Venus De Milo's
purpose and can see the similarities and differences between the two.
Reason:
The
reason for this question is for us to determine the similarities and
differences between the two sculptures.
Purpose:
the
purpose for this question I think is for us to see how both these
sculptures were represented in their time and the importance they
have with each other.
Direction:
The direction I took in answering this was to first find out the
purpose and then compare and contrast the two.
Impressions:
What
impressed me the most was finding out the importance and meaning these sculptures had in their
time.
Part
II
The
Venus of Willendorf is one of the oldest and most famous lady figures
in all of art history. “From Austria, dates from about 24,000 BCE.
Carved from limestone and originally colored with red ocher, the
statuettes swelling, rounded forms make it seem much larger than its
actual 4/3/8-inch height.”(Art history, pg. 6, Marilyn Stokstad)
The Paleolithic people would use these small sculptures to
communicate between groups of hunters and gatherers. “The female
statues may have been among several signature objects that signaled
whether a group was friendly and acceptable for interaction and,
probably, for mating.”(Art History, pg. 7, Marilyn Stokstad) “She
represents the earth and its fertility and continuation of life, the
mother goddess, the universal female principle even if it is in its
most primitive conception.”
(http://www.museumstorecompany.com/Venus-of-Willendorf-Museum-of-Natural-History-Vienna-30-000BC-8-H-on-Marble-Base-p4848.html)
Scholars named it after Venus, the Roman goddess of love.
Venus De Milo known as Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love was made for a sanctuary dedicated to Aphrodite on the Aegean island of Melos. This life size statue is made of Parian marble and its missing arms causes much debate on what this statue indicates. “Some broken pieces (now lost) found with it indicated that the figure was holding out an apple in its right hand. Another theory is that Aphrodite was admiring herself in the highly polished shield of the war god Ares, an image that was popular in the 2nd century BCE. This theoretical “restoration” would explain the pronounced S-curve of the pose and the otherwise unnatural forward projection of the knee.” (Art History, pg. 157, Marilyn Stokstad)
Venus De Milo known as Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love was made for a sanctuary dedicated to Aphrodite on the Aegean island of Melos. This life size statue is made of Parian marble and its missing arms causes much debate on what this statue indicates. “Some broken pieces (now lost) found with it indicated that the figure was holding out an apple in its right hand. Another theory is that Aphrodite was admiring herself in the highly polished shield of the war god Ares, an image that was popular in the 2nd century BCE. This theoretical “restoration” would explain the pronounced S-curve of the pose and the otherwise unnatural forward projection of the knee.” (Art History, pg. 157, Marilyn Stokstad)
Both
Willendorf and De Milo have to do with the Goddess of Love, Venus.
They both represent Women of importance and beauty in their time. Not
only are they both nude but Willendorf is missing a face and feet
while De Milo is missing her arms.
The
Venus of Willendorf and the Venus De Milo have many differences
including detail, how they appear, and also the size. The Venus of
Willendorf with a straight stance stands at a height of only 4 inches
while the Venus De Milo with a S-curve pose stands at a height of 6'8
inches. Venus De Milo shows a lot more detail in the face and body.
Her attractive structure shows signs of beauty and sexuality. Venus
of Willendorf with very little detail throughout the sculpture shows
exaggerated female attributes. “The sculptor exaggerated the
figures female attributes by giving it pendulous breasts, a big
belly, with a deep navel, wide hips, dimpled knees, and buttocks, and
solid thighs.”(Art History, pg. 6, Marilyn Stokstad) By doing this
it showed a women with a strong body expressing health and fertility
ensuring to produce healthy and strong children which would mean the
clan who ever made her would live on.
The
third Venus example I chose to compare and contrast is the Women From
Dolni Vestonice. I chose this because it seems so similar to the
Venus of Willendorf and its date marks 23,000 BCE which for humans
was when they used fire to make durable objects out of mixtures of
water and soil and to me this was interesting. Found in Czech
Republic this sculpture stands at 4 ¼ inches with a similar stance
to Willendorf. Just like Willendorf the women has very little detail
all around, she is bloated, nude, and has wide hips. Woman From
Dolni seems to have straight legs with no feet but in Willendorf you
can see more detail in the legs, thighs, and waist.
