Statue Of Hatshepsut Analysis

1433 Words 6 Pages
Since the first revelation of a piece that was considered as an “artwork”, many styles have been developed throughout the centuries. Artworks have been engendered by different artists in sundry styles, time periods and places. When artists or theorists invents an incipient set of conceptions of an unknown style, it can now be utilized by anyone, sundry times. Once an artist engendered an artwork utilizing a concrete style, another artist can re-visit it as the reference to engender a different style, which is how the timeline for artworks are present now, additionally called as the history of the arts. More proximate from the duration when the fundamentals of the arts were developed, most of the works are placed in art museums. In the Metropolitan Museum of Art, works from different countries around the globe are exhibited of different time periods: 8000 BC to the present. Two oeuvres that were intriguing yet had direct and indirect connections were the Statue of Gudea and Seated Statue of Hatshepsut. …show more content…
2090 B.C, in Girsu of Mesopotamia. It has been constructed with diorite, which was one of the most durable material sculptors could find back then. Far into the history, diorite was often utilized for sculpting the most consequential figures not only because it was durable and costly from importing but additionally the symbolism of diorite itself correlated well with the paramount figure. Because the material was kenned to be highly resistant from fracturing, it was ecumenically symbolised the figure of the statue as the most ascendant and puissant. Wolfgang Heimpel states that the diorite of the Gudea statue must have emanate from a différent place. While diorite occurs in Oman, it does not occur in blocks immensely colossal enough for the manufacture of status” (67). Which betokens that the material is a very extravagant and minimal to engender

Related Documents