John modeled this technique for us today in the Renaissance and 17th C. galleries. In his first example, we compared three landscapes using "elements of art" to draw them together and "learning about perspective" as the teaching goal. John told us before we started exactly what we would be doing, and repeated the themes a couple of times as we went.
We started in front of The Ideal City, a work we have examined before.
Which of the elements of art was the artist most interested in? Possibly line, possibly shape, probably not color. What is the focal point in the distance? How would you walk there? What is in the front and what is in the back? How do you know?
We then moved on to Courtyard of an Inn with Classical Ruins. Here the lines are not as straight, the perspective is more convoluted, and the setting is more natural.
What is in front and what is in back? What is off in the distance? How would you walk there? Is there anything in this picture that you've seen before [the columns, for example]? What's new here? [lots of people, for example] What's happening in this picture?
And then on to the third example.
Here we have several things we've seen before, the colisseum and the arch from The Ideal City, for example, although now more ruined. The road leads you diagonally into the distance, the painter draws your eye there. How would you walk there? How do you know there's a hill on the left? What does the painter use to let you know that? There are lots of wavy lines here, and many places to go in the background.
And to wrap up - which place would you like to visit and why? Which painting did you like the best and why?
Next up, John compared and contrasted two portraits. We started with this young Irish gentleman, casually elegant, well-read, direct. We noted his clothing, including velvet and lace, and tried to decide what kind of man he would be.
Then we walked around to the back of the same wall and checked out this portrait.
Same kinds of questions about his clothing, his bearing. We speculated on his intentions - is he a thief, a beggar, a spy? [The person who donated this painting to the Walters was indeed a spy.] What's with that hole in his hat? Compare him to the young gentleman in the first portrait - would they be friends?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
After watching John do his thing, we started in on our own compare and contrast exercises in the Ancient World galleries.
It would be almost impossible for me to remember and list all the things that were said in these presentations. There were lots of good ideas for future tours, however, so here is the short version for future reference.
Jill compared and contrasted these two sculptures, the Sphinx in Ancient Egypt vs. Artemis with the head of Diana. Sphinxes served as temple figures. Combining the muscular body of a reclining lion with the head of a royal human, the sphinx was a powerful symbol of the ancient Egyptian concept of divine kingship. The short dress (chiton) and remnants of a quiver on her back identify the woman in the statue as Artemis, goddess of the hunt. The head, although also ancient, once belonged to a statue of Aphrodite. Jill talked about the two figures representing deities, perhaps protectors, and talk about how their forms represented their powers. She asked what the two figures would say to each other if they were to have a conversation.
I discussed Gods Bearing Gifts again, this time using a lot of questions to elicit describing the figures as gods, discussing the gifts and what they might signify, and referring to the fact that the sculpture was used on a building. I asked how how would ancient people react when the saw this sculpture on a building? At least, that's what I meant to ask. Based on the responses I got, I probably phrased it differently. I then attempted to contrast the Egyptian piece with the Assyrian Winged Genius. I elicited responses that he was more muscular, vey powerful, carrying different things, wings, etc. I tried to use the fact that both of these sculptures were used on buildings as a theme and a transition, but I think my transition got lost in the shuffle and I'm not sure it worked.
There are so many good things to say about the Winged Genius that I think I just need to keep working on it.
Next Kiki did a great job contrasting Sesostris III with Isis and her son Horus. She pointed out the similarities in their seated postures and their dignity but also the differences. Sesostris has a rather care-worn face, while Isis has a more idealized face. She also noted the difference in material used to create them. These are both great pieces. Memo to self.
Carolina showed us two heads, a pharaoh in a crown and the bust of a scribe. She discussed details of the figures and what those details show us about them and their roles in Egyptian life.
And Kathy used her wooden boat and the wooden side of a coffin. She compared the use of painted wood, figures vs. painted symbols and hieroglyphs to convey meaning, and talked about the Egyptian conception of taking what they needed for the afterlife.
David finished up this day with a really fun comparison of a body-less foot and a foot-less body.
The tomb relief on the left was the first piece. There are two separate scenes actually depicted, easily distinguished by the different scales of the figures. On the left is a man at small scale who bends over a calf, pushing at the rear with one hand while pulling on the rope tied around it's neck with the other. Facing the man and calf is a dog with a rope collar and curled tail. The dog stands at his master's feet, to whose scale he is carved. The tomb owner's staff crosses the body of the dog, as does his left foot. Only the left foot remains. David discussed this piece, asking what we thought the owner of the foot might look like, who he was, etc., and then took us on to the second piece to ask if this body could be matched with that foot (if the scale was matched). Great discussion.
I think our compare and contrast discussions got better as the day went along, because there were lots of things to learn from each other. But sort of like the singers on American Idol sometimes fall because of song selection, I think some of these comparisons worked better than others regardless of the techniques used. Interesting day.
No comments:
Post a Comment