Memi And Sabu Statues

This paper will focus on the Statue of Dionysos leaning on a female figure. Also known as the Hope Dionysos. The statue is displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art and is located on the first floor Roman and Greek art chamber. Upon entering this sector, you will notice a grand statue that catches your eyes and captivates you as it welcomes you in gracefully. The exhibition is set up in the back center of the room, and is noticeable due to the largeness in scale and the enigmatic yet calming disposition the statue portrays. My first impression of the sculpture was how detailed and realistic the statue is. Since the statue was so defined you would be able to identify what he was wearing and how his body was shaped to how long his hair was during this time period. I was profoundly intrigued by how peaceful the statue of Dionysos embodied and found myself coming back to it and looking in awe. In curiosity, I would choose this statue for my assignment because I wanted to learn more about the history of the Hope Dionysos. In this essay I will be describing my formal analysis of the artwork, the subject matter behind it, the artist and the historical content of the statue of Dionysos.

This pair figures represent Yuny and his wife, Renenutet seated with rigidly formal posture next to him. This statue depicts a powerful couple that looks straight ahead, with their heads held up and blank eyes widely open. The form of their features and

During my visit to the Tampa Museum of Art, I observed and viewed various pieces from The Classical World exhibit. While I observed numerous works, I was drawn to a specific piece due to its uniqueness when compared to the other pieces in the exhibit. In this paper, I will be describing The Torso of Aphrodite, using my own viewpoints and the elements of formal art analysis, in order to explain the uniqueness when compared to other pieces in The Classical World exhibit.

Modern figurines of art stem directly from the hands of the ancient’s. The organic forms of modernly sculpted artifacts can most likely be directly referenced to the movements of prehistoric artworks. There seems to be an ongoing transition on how cultures no matter how stretched apart through time, contrasted by ethnicity or religious views; can all be somewhat related to each other by the methods or principles portrayed through their artworks. In fact, I saw that very transition; within two works in which are extremely different in meaning, craftsmanship, time, culture and so on. However, I was still able to find similarities within the artifacts. In this paper I will examine Venus of Willendorf, a Paleolithic carving in limestone; which can fit in the palm of one’s hand. As well as, The Sacrifice of Chacmool, which are a plethora of Mesoamerican statues emulating rituals of sacrifice.

A bronze sculpture consisting of just six rectangular shapes and a semi-rectangular base, this piece is very simple, and its minimalistic structure is similar to that of Malevich’s Supremacist Composition: Airplane Flying. From a certain angle, the sculpture resembles a figure stumbling and falling over the base, depicting some sort of motion. In this sense, it is similar to Boccioni’s Unique Forms of Continuity in Space, which sought to use air currents to symbolize a moving figure. The simplistic yet abstract nature of Shapiro’s work makes it feel right as home in the Modernist Revolution, despite the fact that Shapiro’s sculpture was made in 1991, more than 70 years after the Modernist Revolution occurred. In addition, Untitled is unlike any other “figure” sculpture we have studied thus far. Just about every major sculpture we have covered resembles some form of a human-like body, whether they be an actual human or a divine figure. Even Unique Forms of Continuity in Space possesses what appear to be legs, a head and a torso. The odd and minimalistic composition of Untitled means that is possesses no definite form resembling a human and could very well be meant to resemble something completely unrelated to human, quite possibly an inanimate object or even something that was not meant to be resembled. It is the only work of its kind present at the sculpture garden, and as such, it carries far more mystery than any other work

Throughout different time periods and civilizations come many different types of art that would never be comparable to those of another time or place. There are also the pieces that come from a completely different time and place, but yet they can still be compared to one another. The Torso of a God (Egyptian, New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, last decade of the reign of Amenhotep III, Granodiorite, 1359-1349 B.C.) and the Statue of Asklepios (Greek, Hellenistic period, Pentelic Marble, 2nd century B.C.) are two sculptures made hundreds of years apart, yet they both display many similarities and show how art is constantly changing whilst keeping the same core ideas.

During my visit to the Tampa Museum of Art, I observed and viewed various pieces from The Classical World exhibit. While I observed numerous works, one sculpture stood out when I compared it to the others. In this paper, I will be describing The Torso of Aphrodite, using my own viewpoints and the elements of formal art analysis in order to explain its’ unique qualities that make it different when compared to other pieces in The Classical World exhibit.

With works in every known medium, from every part of the world, throughout all points in history, exploring the vast collection of the Museum of Modern Art was an overwhelming experience. The objects in the Department of European Sculpture and Decorative Arts are an important historical collection, reflecting the development of a number of art forms in Western Europe. The department's holdings covered sculpture in many sizes, woodwork and furniture, ceramics and glass, jewelry, and tapestries. The gallery attracted my appreciation of the realistic qualities of the human body often portrayed in sculpture.

statues display their own set of artistic conventions in their strict symmetry, basic forms, and

The Royal Acquaintances Memi and Sabu was sculpted between the years of 2575–2465 B.C. in the region of Giza, Egypt (Metropolitan Museum of Art a, 2016). The Statue of Gudea was sculpted around the year 2090 B.C. in Girsu (now known as Lagash in Northern Iraq (United States department of Defence, n.d.).

Starting with Bastet, this free-standing statue hails from Late –Ptolemaic Period (664–30 B.C) from Egypt. Medium used was bronze, precious metal and black bronze inlays. The dimensions are H. 5 cm (4 1/8 in.); W. 3.2 cm (1 1/4 in.); D. 3.9 cm (1 9/16 in.). This statuette was donated to the Museum by George and Florence Blumenthal in 1934 and is on view at The Met Fifth Avenue in Gallery 134.

The two sculptures presented for this assignment are the Statue of Gudea, which dates back to 2090 B.C. (“Statue of Gudea,” 2000) and The Royal Acquaintances Memi and Sabu, which dates back to 2575–2465 B.C. (“The Royal Acquaintances Memi and Sabu,” 2000). Both statues represent people; however, they depict different types of people from completely different time periods and cultural backgrounds. The Statue of Gudea shows the ruler of southern Mesopotamian, Gudea, whose reign was from 2144-2124 B.C. (“The votive statue of Gudea: A formal analysis,” 2011) sitting in a praying position with his hands locked and his eyes forward. He is dressed in what appears to be a lavish robe with an inscription that clearly depicts what Gudea thought of himself and his successes during his time as ruler. The Royal Acquaintances Memi and Sabu represent what is thought to be a married ancient Egyptian couple who are lovingly embracing each other. Aside from looking at

The statue can be traced back to two locations; either at the mortuary complex of the king at Kom el Heitan on the Theban west bank, and the Mut Temple Complex at Karnak on the east bank at Thebes. It is most possible that this was found at the latter side. Many of the statues of Sakhmet had second stage of life after they original deployment. The goddess

Initially, when I walked up to this sculpture my thoughts were the name of the piece pretty much sums it up. Approaching the statues, they seem to just be large bronze masses on the corner of McCaul street but, as any art should be looked at, I decided to dig deeper than the superficial. The location is odd to me, mainly because the bronze forms are not alone in the corner of the building, but are not really impacted by its surroundings. The trees behind the statue are dead giving a desolate atmosphere invoking a sense of loneliness. Moreover, almost the entire area surrounding the piece is solid concrete, giving a very penitential outlook. I’m not sure if the sculpture’s initial approach is supposed to invoke miserable emotions but if so it does its job

I like to think of statues as eternally capturing a moment in time. One moment set in stone, forever to share the artist message to all who cross its path. These two statues could not be more different but share so many similarities at the same time. I have purposefully not read anything about these two pieces of art; Statue of Gudea and The Royal Acquaintances Memi and Sabu, I'm going to save this experience, for after I write this introduction. At first glance the Statue of Gudea gave me a calm breath, its something about the way the hands are folded into each other; For The Royal Acquaintances Memi and Sabu I was taken by the casual placement of each of their hands, it felt like a loving and familiar embrace. I'm wondering why the female figure is looking away, was she embarrassed by their embrace? I look forward to learning more about these two sculptures.