Analysis Of The Book ' By Nikolaus Pevsner Essay

SHELDON
NODELMAN
 from
 E.
D’Ambra,
ed.,
Roman
Art
in
Context.
NY:
Prentice
Hall.
1993
pp.
10‐20
 Like all works of art. the portrait is a system of signs; it is often an ideogram of “public’ meanings condensed into the image of a human face. Roman portrait sculpture from the Republic through the late Empire-the second century BCE. to the sixth CE -constitutes what is surely the most remarkable body of portrait art ever created. Its shifting montage of abstractions from human appearance and character forms a language in which the history of a whole society can be read. Beginning in the first century B.C., Roman artists invented a new kind of portraiture, as unlike that of the great tradition of Greek

The Roman rulers from ancient times are well-known for their ability to coax their people into thinking a certain way through the use of convincing pieces of art. The Roman Empire was very troubled and its emperors are infamous for such things as lavish spending, unnecessary war, and even the killing of family members, and this begs the question: how were there so few large scale revolts of the Roman populous? The answer is the use of propaganda in popular Roman culture. The Roman Empire used propaganda for political purposes by incorporating Roman family values, victorious war scenes, and general Roman successes into their artworks.

George Orwell famously declared »all art is propaganda.« Great works of art, in other words, have a very particular message for an intended audience. This function of art transcends historical periods, as is evident if one takes a closer look at the art of specific eras, such as Ancient Egyptian art. Ancient Egyptian art possessed a very specific propaganda function: to promote the divine origins and authority of the Pharaoh and thus a hierarchical social system.

To sum up the art in the period of Augustus, a Shakespearean quote immediately comes to mind. “All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players; they have their exits and their entrances, and one man in his time plays many parts…” Augustus was both the master manipulator in making sure his family looked not just respectable, but irreparably virtuous (despite the reality being vastly different). However, Augustus and art went farther than his family he helped shape a whole new era of art culture.

Section three is about the state; how art pertains to the government and war and how art can be used to protest the government. The title of chapter ten is Power, Politics, and Glory. This chapters shows us how governments, especially historical governments, use art to show off and in some cases for practical use too. One example

During the third debate, the major question discussed during the debate is focusing on the involvement of Augustus in the arts. During the debate, there were strong arguments made by both the praetorians and the tribunes about whether Augustus should be involved in the art and literature aspect of the Roman community. The praetorians debated that Augustus should not have a major impact in the arts and used logos, ethos, and pathos during their debate. Additionally, the tribunes made strong arguments that Augustus’ involvement in the arts will only help the Romans going forward.

In comparison to the renaissance in Italy, the style in the North takes a slightly different form. The Italian art, created in greater proximity to Rome, often exhibits stronger classical and unobscured religious elements. Meanwhile, Northern works take almost an entirely opposite approach. Early on the influence of Gothic styles remain noticeable. Later, humanity takes precedence and theological themes are subtly integrated into landscapes and environments that are otherwise entirely contemporary and relatable to the immediate audience. Artists from the north also engaged in a greater prolificity of secular works such as portraits. We will look at a couple examples from this setting.

The capacity of a society to produce art is, in effect, an exercise of its power. It is through the presence of affluence that a nation is capable of focusing not solely upon survival, but the development and proliferation of culture, of which art is a central element. The Greek and Roman Empires will be explored from this perspective. Herein, the way in which the power of these two empires was exemplified through the art they were capable of producing will be explored in-depth herein.

Did artists create works of art that depicted messages against kings, their country, and people in powerful positions? Many works of art were created during tumultuous times in periods of history and were used as powerful messages and political statement during those times. However; most of these messages have been lost throughout time and the risks that the artist took are being forgotten.

Sculpture was also changing during the rise of the Empire. Augustus continued to propagandize using sculpture as Pompey and Caesar did in the Republic. He effectively used it to promote his ideas and to legitimize him as the Emperor. In 13 BCE, the Senate commissioned the Altar of Augustan Peace. This is perhaps the best example of art propaganda by Augustus. His new moral code was depicted for all to see. This altar shows Augustus as a moral family man and peacemaker for the Empire.

In their lack of idealization and their affection for literal detail they reveal Roman sculpture as a record of commonplace reality.” The bust of Julius Caesar is significant in Roman history because it gives insight into Roman ideals for art and architecture, it provides a historical reference of Julius Caesar, and it demonstrates the importance of the ancestral legacy of the Ancient

Augustus definitely used visual arts as propaganda to promote himself and his laws. Augustus was supreme during the time of his ruling. However, in the piece of art labeled Museo dell’Ara Pacis found in Rome, Italy, he leads the way in the processional of the imperial family with plain dress. He was promoting himself by showing he was same among his equals although this was not the case. In this piece of art, his family members are in the processional with children although the noble class of the Romans were not having much offspring. He used this piece of art as propaganda to encourage them to bear more children for his successor should come from his family, and he used this piece of art to support the laws he had set in place for marriage and larger families.

There is a tremendous amount of artwork from classical societies that still inspires artists and art enthusiasts today. Art can reveal an extensive amount of information regarding the culture of the society from which it was created. To analyze artwork in relation to the culture of the society, the artwork must be studied in a variety of ways. The artwork that will be examined will be the Parthenon from the Classical Greece period, the Nike of Samothrace from the Hellenistic Greece period, the Capitoline She-Wolf from the Etruscan Civilization, a Roman Patrician with Busts of His Ancestors from the Roman Republic, and Pantheon from the Roman Empire civilization.

In 27 BC Augustus began his political career with a “new policy which embodied a national and Roman spirit” (Galinksy, 1996, 225) and “represented new heights in creativity and sophistication” (Galinksy, 1996, 225). Augustus created a new political propaganda campaign that used art and architecture to promote and enhance his regime. The most fundamental message can be regarded as to establish the legitimacy of his rule and to portray him as the natural successor of Rome, as this is consistently presented throughout the visual programme. Yet factors such as the restoration of the Republic, reviving the old religion, nationalism and militaristic triumph can also be seen to be communicated prominently through art and architecture.

For centuries the Romans had commissioned sculptures inspired by the Greeks, included many re-creations of Polykleitus’ Doryphorus. Yet with the rise of the Roman Republic c.a. 509 B.C. “public sculpture included honorific portrait statues of political officials or military commanders erected by the order of their peers in the Senates”(Trentinella). Due to previous corruption in the government, and the lack of consideration for the common class, the Roman people began to scrutinize those who ruled. Historians have noticed this revolution, correlating with the growth of the city-states governing system, reflected regularly