Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Shaman" data-source="post: 3454742" data-attributes="member: 26473">My first year of college I took an art history survey course, one of those 100-level general ed classes everyone suffers through to satisfy the Chinese take-out menu aspect of degree requirements (". . . one from column A, one from column B, with two order you get free egg roll!").I was fortunate to have an instructor who didn't care that 95% of the class was there simply to have their tickets to graduation punched. He skillfully engaged the class by teaching us not only about the artwork but how to look at art - he introduced me to the "three-step museum patron," who upon walking up to a work of art first looks at the information card to see what it is and who it's by, then looks at the work for a moment, then looks back at the card to make sure s/he didn't miss anything important before moving on to the next piece in the gallery. (Stand back and watch people in an art museum some time, and you'll see this over and over again.)During our discussion of Renaissance artists and artwork, the professor taught us that the subject matter of most art during the period was fairly limited, mostly commissions consisting of either scenes from the Bible or scenes from antiquity (often presented as biblical allegories). Despite the limited selection of topics, the actual content of paintings in particular varied dramatically - one Abraham and Isaac could be quite different from another, based on what the artist brought to the work. For example, the depiction of Jesus' entry into Jerusalem could include all the elements of a genre painting, showing life in a Renaissance port town through the people and features presented as "background" to what was ostensibly the subject of the painting.Many artists explored humanist philosophy, social satire, and other non-religious and non-classical themes while adhering  to the tastes and standards of the period. The professor pointed out that what separates one depiction of the martyrdom of St. Stephen from another is the innovation, the idiosyncracy, the imagination - the creativity - the artist brings to the work while preserving the original subject matter intact.I think some people tend to confuse or conflate creativity with unfettered fancy. In my experience they are not the same thing at all.</blockquote>

Verification