European Art: Stone Age to the Renaissance
PHOTO: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_of_Venus
The Birth of Venus
12.9.2019
​
One would have to live under a rock to not recognize the soft and beautiful face of Venus in the Birth of Venus by Sandro Botticelli. She is a repeated motif in our lives, representing the perfect ideal of beauty and love. It makes a person wonder if Botticelli could have ever imagined the continual impact of this piece so many years later. Housed in the Uffizi Gallery in Florence, Italy, there is no doubt that she stands among the masterpieces of the Italian Renaissance. By using humanistic themes and refined materials, Botticelli created one of the most notable masterpieces of the Italian Renaissance—the Birth of Venus.
​
To the Greeks, she is Aphrodite, but to the Romans, she is Venus—the goddess of beauty and love. Venus is shown slightly to the right of center in this work, standing on a large scallop shell as flowers float around her. She was born of the sea foam, and it arrives on the island of Cyprus (“Botticelli’s”). Botticelli took inspiration from classical statues for Venus’ contrapposto pose, and she covers her modesty with her long, flowing golden hair with the exception of one uncovered breast (“The Birth”). The painter gave her an idealized face―unblemished―to showcase her beauty and perfection. One of the Graces, or the Hora of Spring, Pomona, greets her from the right with a billowing rose cloak adorned in flowers―a symbol of spring―to cover the goddess’s form. On the left are the Winds: Zephyrus and the nymph Chloris―also known as Aura. Flying in an embrace, Zephyrus blows Venus to shore. Zephyrus’ breath has the power of creating new life, and his embrace with the nymph symbolizes the act of love (Long). There is a playfulness to them, highlighted by the male/female pairing, their nudity, and their tortuous pose. Overall, these figures create a visual balance, each with his or her purpose and contribution to the work.
​
A significant distinction is the nudity of the goddess. Nudity was not commonly depicted in women of the middle ages, though there are a few exceptions, such as the Venus Pudicans (“Botticelli’s”). However, male nudity was a symbol of heroism and importance in ancient times. Sexuality is a negative trait in Christian culture, which created a conflicted attitude towards nudity (Long). Specifically, Botticelli took inspiration from the statue Aphrodite of Cnidos, where the goddess also covers herself modestly (“Botticelli’s”). Botticelli highlighted her naked form by painting a subtle, dark line around the contours of her body, causing her to “pop” against the image, emphasizing her pearly, marble-esque skin. She is the center of our gaze, and all attention rests on her and the modest, nude form, even though at the time, her nudity was seen as controversial.
​
The medium is also notable, as the artist used exceptional technique and tempera on canvas instead of wood, the most popular surface at the time (“Botticelli’s”). It was the first painting in Tuscany done on canvas (“Birth of”). Wood panels, despite their popularity, tended to warp in the humid Italian climate. Canvas was a much better option, as it kept its integrity in the moisture and was cost-effective (“Botticelli’s”). Canvas was not the most luxurious option but was appropriate for paintings of non-official locations, like a family home (“Botticelli’s”). Another unique characteristic of the work was that Botticelli used fine and expensive alabaster powder, crafting the colors to be vibrant and long-lasting (“Birth of”). These fine materials have lasted well over time, contributing to the timelessness of the masterpiece.
​
The theme of the birth was inspired by the ancient poet Homer and from Ovid’s Metamorphoses—an oeuvre of the Latin literature that held much significance (“Birth of”). The theme of the work is evident in Neoplatonic philosophy: the birth of love and spiritual beauty as the driving force for life. The demand for this type of scene was that of a humanistic approach—a popular Renaissance theme during that time, especially in the court of Lorenzo d’Medici, a descendant of Lorenzo the Magnificent (“Botticelli’s”). One can see the humanistic characteristics of Birth of Venus in Venus herself: her symbolism, detail, perspective, and the realism of her body and face. Often, allegories from the classical culture of Olympian divinities and mythology were used to express humanistic values (Long). Humanism is centralized around realism and the human experience, and the Birth of Venus is no exception to these ideals.​
​
There was controversy around this type of painting due to the family that commissioned it and the nudity. She was painted for the Medici family by Botticelli from 1484-1485 (“The Birth”). Though many wealthy people appreciated the piece’s elegance, the work was still patronized due to the controversy of the Medici family (“Botticelli’s”). Many saw the family as corrupt and vile (“Botticelli’s”). The flip side of this is that some argue the painting is a tribute to classical literature, which creates an optimistic ode to the wealthy family (“Birth of”). The presence of such a painting makes for a sense of appreciation for love and sexuality in Florence, all thanks to the Medici family.​
​
The pleasure of viewing Birth of Venus by Botticelli in person is not to be taken for granted. The elegance enraptures the viewer, and the eyes drink in the ethereal and luminous goddess of love flanked by the Winds and Hora of Spring. But, Botticelli makes no serious attempt to convince us this setting could ever exist in reality. It is impossible to stand on a giant shell in the water, and roses do not float perfectly through the air. It is a fantastic painting with a simple composition, with the four central figures centralized in the foreground. Yet, it holds a significant impact, combining both land and sea. The viewer hardly notices the simplicity of the water compared to the detailed depictions of the figures and various foliage. One cannot help but be in awe of the beauty and perfection of the goddess as she covers herself with her long golden hair. Her features are elongated, and she holds an unnatural stance that would throw any actual human off balance. Her exaggerated contrapposto stance and long body celebrate her femininity, not diminish it. There is no doubt that, despite the strangeness of the scene, the Birth of Venus is a masterpiece.
​
Plato argued that gazing upon physical beauty lifted the mind towards the ideal realm of divine love (Long). The goddess’ dual symbolism of intellectual passion and physical desire juxtaposes the sacred and profane aspects of love. Her beauty is a vehicle for the human soul to reach the divine. The humanistic themes are not to be diminished, as the image is a symbol of the birth of beauty in the mind of humanity. Botticelli used fine materials such as canvas, instead of simple wood, and alabaster pigments to create the masterpiece, contributing to its timelessness and elegance. Despite its controversy—being commissioned by a wealthy family and the goddess’ nudity—there is no denial that Botticelli confirmed that the birth of love and spiritual beauty is a driving force of life through the Birth of Venus.
​
​
​
Works Cited
“Birth of Venus by Sandro Botticelli at Uffizi Gallery in Florence.” Visit Uffizi,
www.visituffizi.org/artworks/the-birth-of-venus-by-sandro-botticelli/.
“Botticelli's Birth of Venus.” ItalianRenaissance.org,
www.italianrenaissance.org/botticelli-birth-of-venus/.
“The Birth of Venus by Botticelli: Artworks: Uffizi Galleries.” The Birth of Venus by Botticelli | Artworks | Uffizi Galleries, www.uffizi.it/en/artworks/birth-of-venus.
Long, Jane C. “Botticelli’s ‘Birth of Venus’ as Wedding Painting.” Aurora: The Journal of the History of Art, vol. 9, Nov. 2008, pp. 1–27. EBSCOhost,
search.ebscohost.com/login.aspxdirect=true&db=aft&AN=505272035&site=
ehost-live&scope=site.
Eythidikos Kore
10.03.2019
​
Eythidikos Kore, also called “The sulky kore,” is of the severe style made in approximately 480 BC, or the first half of the 5th century. She stands in the New Acropolis Museum in Athens, Greece as one of the last archaic daughters of the Athenian Acropolis. She was carved by the same artist who made Kritios Boy in 490 BC, both carved of marble from Paros, Greece. On her base is inscribed “Euthydikos, son of Thaliarchos, dedicated.” This daughter was dedicated to Athena by Euthydikos, the son of Thaliarch. Small, but mighty, she is a pillar of Grecian beauty and history.
In terms of craftsmanship, there is much to note. The middle of her is missing, so she is no longer intact. This is due to the fact that, overtime, the stone may crumble or erode, or poor excavation can lead to statue damage. She is wearing an ionic style dress of thin chiton. There is a painted frieze depicting a chariot race on the dress. ​You can see that she holds movement in her arms as they are bent, and the left foot is in front of the right—a classic contrapposto stance—iconic during this time. Her left arm is pulling the skirt to the side, which is a characteristic gesture of archaic art. She is holding a special offering to Athena under her right arm. It was common for kore to have something as an offering to the gods. She also has a lack of the “archaic smile” standard during this period. With low eyebrows, thick eyelids, deep-set eyes, round shoulders, soft breasts, slender legs, and feet, she is delicate and rounded.
​
Unlike the other daughters, she wears no jewelry but only a simple strip in her long hair. Her hair is simple, with an emphatic middle part and three long, braided tresses that fall over each shoulder. She comfortably holds the object, and her garment leaves a breast uncovered while the braids fall over them to cover the nude. This slight nudity is different from the other daughters and is unusual in kore depictions, as they are always fully clothed. This piece was part of the beginning of the Classical Era in ancient Greek art.
​
Upon visiting her in person, it is surprising how small she is. There are remnants of color on her lips and eyes. It is also notable that her clothes and body are equally proportioned—in other kouri sculptures, the clothing can overwhelm the womanly form. Her drapery does not take away from her presence, but compliments her. She is both a pleasure and privilege to visit in person, her history and simplicity a gift to this earth.
​
Work Cited
Statue of a Kore. The "Eythidikos Kore." https://www.theacropolismuseum.gr/en/statue-kore-eythidikos-kore
Photo: Wikimedia Commons GNU FDL
The Venus of Willendorf
2.10.2020
​
Upon first glance, the Venus of Willendorf is somewhat surprising, though she is small. She cannot help but be fascinating to a viewer: An artist from one of the earliest human civilizations chose to depict a large, shapely woman with a stylized head. Back in those times, when food and resources were such a commodity, it is surprising to see the idealization of such a large, shapely form. One cannot help but appreciate her bulbous shape. The stylization and idealization of a larger female form is a rarity in our society that only seems to enjoy thin, fit bodies--making this piece much more significant in representing beauty ideals through time. The abstraction of her head is also notable, as the artist had no issue exaggerating the rest of her body but chose to cover her facial features. The Venus of Willendorf is an idealization of the female form as a symbol of fertility, making her the ideal woman in a time when resources and reproducing were of the utmost importance.
​
The Venus of Willendorf was found in Willendorf, Austria in 1908. She is from ca. 28,000-25,000 BCE, indicating that she is of the Paleolithic style. She was carved from one limestone and was then covered in red ochre, most likely by a male artist and for a male patron (Kuiper). There are some remnants of red pigment still on the carving today, though the natural color of the stone is the predominant color. Other than that, there is little known about her origin (Kuiper). She’s four and a quarter inches high, relatively small, and palm-sized. We know she is a woman because of her large breasts and vaginal area. The only covering is of her face and head with a rope or braid. Her arms are crossed over her breasts. Because she is small, this forces us to take a closer look at her details.
​
Her size could be due to artist limitation, as carving something small is much easier than cutting a large piece of stone. The limestone she is made of is not from Willendorf, meaning her material was transported from somewhere else (Kuiper). Furthermore, her feet have broken off, so she is incomplete. The stone is rough due to erosion. But when light hits her, parts of her still shine—suggesting she may have been polished at one time. Her form, overall, is smooth and rounded. Her head has a bumpy texture that wraps around her head. There is nothing straight or rigid about her, except that she is facing forward without any motion from her arms or legs. Her arms are crudely depicted, curving over her bulbous breasts, hardly noticeable upon first glance. There are curved lines under her breasts and belly that flow into the vaginal region. There are implied lines around her head. Some have speculated the continual pattern to be a braided design (Kuiper). She is meant to be viewed “in the round.” However, minor detail is depicted on her backside, indicating that she is best viewed frontally. Though she appears seemingly simple, much can be inferred from the exaggeration of her features.
​
It has been suggested that she was initially seen as a “fertility figure, good-luck totem, mother goddess symbol, or an aphrodisiac made by men for the appreciation of men” (Kuiper). This theme is all too familiar today. That being said, the shape is her most important visual element, as she is the idealized form of a fertile woman. Though she is small, her large, bulbous form dominates space. If she was indeed a mother goddess symbol, it is only appropriate she would command the room in which she resides. Though she is top-heavy, there is a balance achieved through the exaggeration of her head and breasts, in addition to her belly. Her belly button also creates a focal point for the viewer’s eye. This is especially notable; for her widest part, perhaps the most prominent feature is her belly and hip region—further affirming the idealization of a fertile female. The viewers’ eyes can travel over the rounded form like water, with a break at a small, triangular pelvis. Her rounded and exaggerated figure all point to the idealization of the fertile woman.
​
Overall, if she were a fertility figure, she would strongly emphasize the value of reproductivity in this culture. If she were a good luck totem or symbol, this would underline superstition and cultural beliefs. As for an aphrodisiac, this would suggest the appreciation of not only reproductivity but pleasure. If that is the case, it would make sense to idealize a woman in figurine form. It is clear from the exaggeration of her breasts and belly that she idolizes a fertile woman. It is unclear why some short of rope or braid is wrapped around her head, covering her facial features, but this has been linked to the reproductive cycle (Kuiper). That being said, this would only further her fertility symbolism. Though she is but little, she is a fierce indicator of the substantial value of fertility and reproduction in a woman when food, resources, and reproduction were of the utmost importance.
​
Work Cited
Kuiper, Kathleen. “Venus of Willendorf.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia
Britannica, Inc., 11 July 2018, www.britannica.com/topic/Venus-of-Willendorf.