Look At Art example essay topic

Going Back to Archaic Greece The Amasis Painter seemed to lure me into his world while reading these works compiled by these very prolific writers. Or maybe it was the writers that brought me back to experience what they felt while studying these paintings and giving up their thoughts to question as they questioned others. In either case it has sparked my interest in this painter, and potter if you will. He combines a perfectionistic attitude with an imaginative flare that is subtle and refined, giving him that contrasting edge that one looks for in an artist.

I would first like to start with a look at these artists status in the Athenian Greek world. How did they become artists and how did they live as artists? One might suspect that you need just to turn to the old adage of the "starving artist", to get a good idea of what it was like, but I hardly think they were starving or even poor for that matter. Of course I wouldn't suspect that they were very well off at what they were doing, but they probably didn't do to bad. In fact I look at Pedly and what he says that, "vase painting... is the product of private enterprise" (Pedly p 77). This gives me speculation that the vase painters in Archaic Greece might have been sufficiently paid for their services.

I get a sense of secure ness of who he is and what he's doing with his paintings and his pots for that matter. If he does do both it would cut out another hand in the trading deal that would no doubt increase the size of his share. Also by doing this he has total control over the whole making of the vase itself, which shows in the way he presents the figures spatially and sometimes even simply in his works Something that adds to that of course is competition between artists, especially between Exekias and Amasis. These two were the closest in style, and were probably the most sought after painters of their time. A specific vase by Exekias has Memnon with two African attendants naming one of them Amasis.

One can conjecture that there stands a good chance that he may be speaking of his colleague. Whether this is derogative towards Amasis in some way, maybe through his heritage, who knows, it shows competition either way. Competition leads to great art, and these men were making just that, so the influence on one another creates a big factor with this. With this influence the money maybe increases or the trades are a little better than usual, so competition helps. Finding that new thing was crucial in this art as it would be for ages to come. So does this start the genre we call "fine art", well this beginning seems to be of some debate among scholars today.

Reforms that were starting to take place at that time and the context that the painted vessel took around the mid 6th century are contributors to change from one genre to another. The government had decided to install running water at fountain houses for the Greeks to take advantage of. This change and others similar to it brought on certain technological luxuries that the Greeks weren't really all naturally accustomed to. They started thinking more highly of their own status and place in society, which led to a different way of thinking in general. Taking this into account one could infer that art was considered more than just a political, social, and religious outlet. People were still using mythological settings and characters, but art started to become something on it's own, people started doing things for art's sake.

Perhaps these luxuries led to more analytical thinking towards art, in either case art imitated what it saw and fountain house depictions are installed into this type of art. Sidestepping just briefly, I'd like to look at the type of architecture that these painters, like Amasis, were using. It's hard to get good representations of the buildings that the Archaic Greeks lived in. We look written documents, the remains of the buildings at a site, and we also look at art.

Here we see good accounts of columned buildings, but with only one problem. These buildings had a tendency to lean more toward the surreal than the real. With time however they started to become for realistic as the artists wanted to depict a more sound representation of their work. I look at the paintings showing the young newly wed couple and I look at the house in which they are believed to be sharing after marriage. The modesty that the house portrays is key to the feeling to this painting. If he were to have put a grandiose Doric columned building with the men riding up to it you'd get a sense a grand life to be played out in wealth and ease, but with that building you get the sense of a humble beginning, but a happy one nonetheless.

Architecture was basically used to, spatially define an area, create depth, and to create a three dimensional layout that the artist could then work with. The reason I mention this is because the Amasis Painter relies heavily on using the space given to him, and what he should do with that space. By painting something that starts to confine that space, especially with the size of the pots and cups that he was accustomed to making, changes the whole aspect to that painting. Because that wedding seen was modest in the way he portrayed the house, the sense of traditionalism starts to creep in, a Greek notion that goes well with marriage. I'd like to stay somewhat close to the same topic but take a different direction and show how a name can tell you a lot about the person and his lineage and maybe his status. Amasis, as you probably already know, is an Egyptian name that had been Hellenized by the Greeks.

Given this aspect about him some tend to think that he was Egyptian naturally, while others refute that his all to close Athenian style in painting makes him Athenian. Personally I think they are both right, that or these Athenian vase painters maybe wanted to sort of be foreign by taking on foreign names. I'd also like to point out that Exekias and the Lydian painter were foreign names as well, and they were his contemporaries. Another aspect to this picture is that places like Etruria and Ionia were looking for these painted pots, they were really never found in Athens. The fact also remains that Athens didn't actually come up with its own style, it was constantly borrowing from places like the Oriental Near East, Corinth, and Ionia. Athens seemed to represent the axle in which all these factors were the spokes to a great wheel that created this great artist.

Something worth noting is the fact that Amasis made an alabastron, the only in Athens at the time, that had Egyptian qualities. Going back to the 'beginning of fine art' it seems likely enough that these artists did start something that would change the way people not only looked at art but how they experienced it and how they perceived what it really could represent. I hate to be redundant, but by using the same quote by Pedly in that ' vase painting... is the product of private enterprise', through private enterprise one sees the wealthy attaining these ever increasingly priced pieces of art. These vase painters paved the way for artists to come, yet should they be considered fine artists just because they create more money and they perfect their technique, probably not.

The meaning and thought behind these paintings is what makes them 'fine art. ' Homer seems to push these men through their depictions of certain gods like Apollo, Athena, Posiedon, Athena, and Dionysus, of which I'll get back to later, and heroes like Achilles and Ajax. Exekias seems to admire the pure friendship that Ajax has for Achilles with his famous depictions of them together, one playing a game, another when he carries the dead Achilles from the battle field, the last of Ajax's suicide. While both do scenes from the Trojan war and heroes like Herakles, Amasis seems to lean more toward using gods than heroes.

While using the gods more often he uses them in a different respect than let's say Exekias. Amasis might have used Homer's idea of the invisible yet present god. They would often be in a mundane setting with the god presiding over the situation at hand. Or even just regular scenes of daily life.

Again a great example is the marriage scene played out by an ordinary common couple that shows his appreciation for the important moments in our lives. Andrew Stewart puts it best by saying that the painter (s) would look for 'turning points' that would create continuation in the mind of the viewer and therefore maybe bring more of their imagination to mingle with the painter's. Taking in the fact that Amasis was definitely a high-class painter during his time, one might want to look at the implications for him being a potter as well. Martin Robertson points out that in the Greek and Latin languages there is no difference between the words 'craft and art', probably because they were so closely related to one another. Again the point in which we think to make this distinction is right in the Archaic period with these artists.

Along with mass production these artists were producing masterpieces that changed the way we look at art. Saying this, I believe Amasis may have made each pot with a personal pride that shows not only in his art work, but in his potting as well. We believe that he collaborated with other painters and if this is so than it seems almost impossible to me that he didn't make his own pots. Each pot that he makes or selects seems to be light and user friendly, giving it that complete feel when mixed with superb artistry. These pots were clearly something that the artist saw as important parts of the way they wanted their illustrations to be seen, especially the way Amasis seemed to have a spatially symmetrical aspect to his paintings. They brought the potter to a new level or to a more respected level, while at the same time creating fine art.

Influences from other art forms were quite possible and evident in painting, as was painting in other art forms. Architecture was definitely seen and observed as I've stated earlier, as was Homer and his ideas for the paintings, but sculpture seemed to have somehow probably been more influenced by painting than painting by it. Considering the amount of vase paintings compared to the amount of sculpture that has been found is the reason why someone might think this. Something to remember though is the context that a vase has compared to a sculpture. A sculpture was art that was made to be looked at and admired publicly, while vases still had a practical use, whether it be the symposium or for funerary purposes. Of course the sculpture could have votive ties or public commemorations for symbolism, but that added to the artistic touch that the sculptor dealt with.

Even so pots were cheaper and could be made more easily and at a quicker pace, so it seems very likely that vase painting helped sculpture with the "human figure in motion" (Ridgeway p 85). Although at the same time an influential public piece could definitely spurn a painter to give their own rendering of the same statement.