The artworks discussed in this course covered centuries of artifacts produced by past cultures. Certain artifacts that survived the change of time are now preserved and are considered to be used for conversation and display. What determines which artifacts are worthy of studying change by the opinions from art historians, collectors, to professors. By labelings artifacts and objects as art means they define what transcends their original function in some way. They can be considered beautiful, well designed, or made with skilled craftsmanship. Although, in some cases the question of what is art does not have to with their craftsmanship or the beauty. It is argued that work of art embodies the power and privilege of the culture it originated
…show more content…
In some cases artifacts were not made to be focused and praised for their aesthetic value, in exception to when the class learned the Minoan culture made art for it’s own sake and embellished beauty. However, in most cultures well done craftsmanship, technique, idealized concepts were appreciated, such as the Egyptian pyramids, temples and funerary complexes where they exemplified how human civilizations exceeded in the architectural structures. Yet The Head of Nefertiti is a work of art because it idealized portrait of stunning beauty and incorporated stylized representations by the artist's hands. The line between images and art blur as centuries and civilizations developed, creating a sense of unity between the two. An example of that idea would be the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Chartres where it is an image of Christianity but also fuse the divine art of stained glass medium that integrated a continuous narrative of Christian stories. In Survey of Western Art I, even though we were lectured that technically the course was a study of history of images and the iconographic meanings of past cultures, I would consider this course truly taught a combination of images and art. That the images are the ideas that is portrayed by art of any medium. Never have I been challenged to question the difference of what is an image and what is art. From a very young age it was presented to me that all works or artifacts from humanity's past ancestors was to absorb the beauty and evolution of
In some cases artifacts were not made to be focused and praised for their aesthetic value, in exception to when the class learned the Minoan culture made art for it’s own sake and embellished beauty. However, in most cultures well done craftsmanship, technique, idealized concepts were appreciated, such as the Egyptian pyramids, temples and funerary complexes where they exemplified how human civilizations exceeded in the architectural structures. Yet The Head of Nefertiti is a work of art because it idealized portrait of stunning beauty and incorporated stylized representations by the artist's hands. The line between images and art blur as centuries and civilizations developed, creating a sense of unity between the two. An example of that idea would be the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Chartres where it is an image of Christianity but also fuse the divine art of stained glass medium that integrated a continuous narrative of Christian stories. In Survey of Western Art I, even though we were lectured that technically the course was a study of history of images and the iconographic meanings of past cultures, I would consider this course truly taught a combination of images and art. That the images are the ideas that is portrayed by art of any medium. Never have I been challenged to question the difference of what is an image and what is art. From a very young age it was presented to me that all works or artifacts from humanity's past ancestors was to absorb the beauty and evolution of