How does art happen?
This is an interesting question as there are so many different genres of art and each has so many different sub categories within in them. If we look at painting we see all the different paints that can be used, oil paint, water based paint, spray paint and then there are even more surfaces that can be used to paint on.
Art can happen in anyway but I think that it always starts in ones feelings. How we are feeling and the situations we are experiencing at the time reflect in our work. I was going to say that real art comes from within and is a personal expression so commissioned work didn’t seem that real to me. While I still hold this point of view to some extent I can see that our emotions always bleed through into our work. If we look at the Sis Teen Chapel, considered one of the greatest works of all time, we learn that Michael Angelo didn’t even want to do it; he was a sculptor not a painter. But he took what he was commissioned to do and we see how it was an expression of him. We see this especially in the way he made the devil look like Biagio da Cesena that was something that was happening in his life and it came through in his work.
I think the hardest part about art for me is coming up with a concept to creatively display your emotions. If people simply painted rainbows when they were happy and rainy days when they were sad art would be extremely boring. Thankfully there is so much creativity in this world that this will never be the case.
How artists get to this concept differs, some see it before hand and then start their work, others begin working and the concept develops through the course of their work. I am the kind of person that starts and develops the idea, I like this style, as there cannot really be any mistakes as you are adapting and changing stuff as you go. If you picture something before hand, it may not come out the way you would have liked. When we did our carvings on the zinc tablets my work developed as it went, it started with a basic idea of me wanting to do a leaf, and then when I began the veins of the leaf I thought it would be cool to do them as different patterns, and as I started the patterns I began to see which ones I liked where. The whole piece developed from a simple leaf to my representation of the leaf, and what I thought would be fun to create.
I really believe that art is more of an internal thing, an expression of what is inside, and some people are just more gifted at displaying externally aka artists, but anyone can do art and that is why it is beautiful.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Theology 314 : 28/09
Jews, Gypsies, North Africans and Mexicans. This is quite a broad topic that we have but I am going to try and look at what the different groups have in common and the relevance they have in my life.
Each one of these groups has negative stereotypes about them, Jews are cheap, Gypsies are thieves, North Africans and Mexicans are illegal immigrants. While it is true that every group of people have some negative stereotypes the problem with minorities being stereotyped is that people judge the whole group according to that stereotype. For example, if a black person got into a fight at a party then the assumption of most is that ‘blacks’ are violent and partake in buffoonish behavior, where as if a middle class white person got into a fight at a party then to onlookers it is not white people that are violent, it is “Bob” that is violent. Minorities are judged and assumptions are made about them due to the actions of individuals, where as the same does not serve true for non minorities.
I believe this is the reason there is so much hatred and discrimination in our world today, people over look facts a lot of the time and just use this judgment procedure. While it is true that these stereotypes do serve true for some members of these groups and other minorities, one needs to try and think outside of their little bubble and try see the world through someone else’s eyes.
In my sociology class there was a big debate about illegal immigrants in America and everyone had strong feelings on the situation saying that they were wasting American tax payer’s money and taking their jobs and if they wanted to come to America they should ‘simply’ get a visa. As the only foreign person in the class I sat quietly for fear that I would be lynched. However the professor decided to call on me for my opinion, nervously I decided to tell the mob of angry villagers how I felt. I stated upfront that I was LEGAL just to cover my bases, I then went on to ask if any of them had an idea how ‘simple’ it was to get a visa. No one knew, so I told them to simply apply for a working visa to America costs $5000, in my currency that is R 40,000 and a heck of a lot of money. This is just an assumption but I would say that any Mexicans or other group of people looking to jump the border and risk their lives do not have this type of money lying around. My next point was that everyone in that class had never had to wonder where their next meal was coming from, or where they would sleep for the night. They may not be ‘wealthy’ in relation to some of their friends but they are by no means living in any sort of poverty, so if they tried, as impossible as it is, to think through that persons mindset, does coming to America to take a manual labor job that no one else wants and work for way below minimum wage really seem that bad. I am sure that these people would much rather stay in their own countries with their families if it was possible. We need to realize that your heritage does not make you better then anyone else, you did not do anything to be born into a country where your opportunities are endless, and if people look at the facts they would see that many of their beliefs they have about minorities are not true. So, I do feel that people need to be more sympathetic to the plight of the illegal immigrant and other minorities.
Bottom line of this whole story is that we can not let individuals define our thoughts on a whole group of people. We need to try and spend time with different people in a positive environment instead of having our only interactions with minorities be negative.
Each one of these groups has negative stereotypes about them, Jews are cheap, Gypsies are thieves, North Africans and Mexicans are illegal immigrants. While it is true that every group of people have some negative stereotypes the problem with minorities being stereotyped is that people judge the whole group according to that stereotype. For example, if a black person got into a fight at a party then the assumption of most is that ‘blacks’ are violent and partake in buffoonish behavior, where as if a middle class white person got into a fight at a party then to onlookers it is not white people that are violent, it is “Bob” that is violent. Minorities are judged and assumptions are made about them due to the actions of individuals, where as the same does not serve true for non minorities.
I believe this is the reason there is so much hatred and discrimination in our world today, people over look facts a lot of the time and just use this judgment procedure. While it is true that these stereotypes do serve true for some members of these groups and other minorities, one needs to try and think outside of their little bubble and try see the world through someone else’s eyes.
In my sociology class there was a big debate about illegal immigrants in America and everyone had strong feelings on the situation saying that they were wasting American tax payer’s money and taking their jobs and if they wanted to come to America they should ‘simply’ get a visa. As the only foreign person in the class I sat quietly for fear that I would be lynched. However the professor decided to call on me for my opinion, nervously I decided to tell the mob of angry villagers how I felt. I stated upfront that I was LEGAL just to cover my bases, I then went on to ask if any of them had an idea how ‘simple’ it was to get a visa. No one knew, so I told them to simply apply for a working visa to America costs $5000, in my currency that is R 40,000 and a heck of a lot of money. This is just an assumption but I would say that any Mexicans or other group of people looking to jump the border and risk their lives do not have this type of money lying around. My next point was that everyone in that class had never had to wonder where their next meal was coming from, or where they would sleep for the night. They may not be ‘wealthy’ in relation to some of their friends but they are by no means living in any sort of poverty, so if they tried, as impossible as it is, to think through that persons mindset, does coming to America to take a manual labor job that no one else wants and work for way below minimum wage really seem that bad. I am sure that these people would much rather stay in their own countries with their families if it was possible. We need to realize that your heritage does not make you better then anyone else, you did not do anything to be born into a country where your opportunities are endless, and if people look at the facts they would see that many of their beliefs they have about minorities are not true. So, I do feel that people need to be more sympathetic to the plight of the illegal immigrant and other minorities.
Bottom line of this whole story is that we can not let individuals define our thoughts on a whole group of people. We need to try and spend time with different people in a positive environment instead of having our only interactions with minorities be negative.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Hum 325: Universal Roman Church
When I first came to Walsh it was the first time I came into contact with people that were Roman Catholic. I had met people who called themselves Catholic, but this almost ancient term had eluded me for much of my life. I wondered what it meant and how someone all the way across the ocean without a hint of Italian heritage was Roman Catholic. What made this church Roman?
I have put a lot of thought into my conclusions that I have come up with as to why the church is Roman, but I would by no means claim to be an authority on the situation. The first part about the church being Roman is obviously the roots. It is in Rome, under Constantine’s rule and St Peter’s guidance that Christianity really began to get its foundation and grow into what it is today. Before it was an illegal religion, and while it had followers and they were growing, it really grew when it became the religion of the state in Rome.
Whenever we walk into these beautiful cathedrals, my first thought is,” WOW this is an incredible monument”, my next thought is, “ all this fancy stuff seems a bit unnecessary for a church when there are so many people the church could help with this money.” As I have learnt more about Rome and seen the importance of statues and monuments and decorations in their lives, I finally begin to understand why these are/were necessary. Yes, there would be many more practical uses for the time and money spent on these cathedrals, but in a time where emperors built magnificent buildings to glorify themselves, it is certainly fitting to go above and beyond to build something for the most high God. To have huge buildings like that of St Peter’s Cathedral to show a reverence for God, it is almost a way of saying we put you above everything else. I believe this to be the Roman part of the church today.
Now we can go on to look at how the church is global. The most effective and basic way to do this is to look at what the church is. We all know that a church is a building of worship, but THE church is simply a group of believers. There are catholic people on every continent of this world, and so without a doubt geographically, the church is global. The church is also global in the sense that anyone can come to the church, it is not only open to one group of people. People of different races, gender and social classes are allowed ( I choose the word allowed instead of welcomed as unfortunately I feel there are still many people within the church who do not welcome people of all kinds).
There is definitely a universal feel with a Roman twist to the Roman Catholic church.
I have put a lot of thought into my conclusions that I have come up with as to why the church is Roman, but I would by no means claim to be an authority on the situation. The first part about the church being Roman is obviously the roots. It is in Rome, under Constantine’s rule and St Peter’s guidance that Christianity really began to get its foundation and grow into what it is today. Before it was an illegal religion, and while it had followers and they were growing, it really grew when it became the religion of the state in Rome.
Whenever we walk into these beautiful cathedrals, my first thought is,” WOW this is an incredible monument”, my next thought is, “ all this fancy stuff seems a bit unnecessary for a church when there are so many people the church could help with this money.” As I have learnt more about Rome and seen the importance of statues and monuments and decorations in their lives, I finally begin to understand why these are/were necessary. Yes, there would be many more practical uses for the time and money spent on these cathedrals, but in a time where emperors built magnificent buildings to glorify themselves, it is certainly fitting to go above and beyond to build something for the most high God. To have huge buildings like that of St Peter’s Cathedral to show a reverence for God, it is almost a way of saying we put you above everything else. I believe this to be the Roman part of the church today.
Now we can go on to look at how the church is global. The most effective and basic way to do this is to look at what the church is. We all know that a church is a building of worship, but THE church is simply a group of believers. There are catholic people on every continent of this world, and so without a doubt geographically, the church is global. The church is also global in the sense that anyone can come to the church, it is not only open to one group of people. People of different races, gender and social classes are allowed ( I choose the word allowed instead of welcomed as unfortunately I feel there are still many people within the church who do not welcome people of all kinds).
There is definitely a universal feel with a Roman twist to the Roman Catholic church.
Monday, September 20, 2010
hum 225: 20/09
The Pieta by Michael Angelo was my favorite piece of art that we saw; it is located in St Peters Basilica in the Vatican City. It is a life size statue of the Virgin Mary holding her son Jesus in her arms and is made from a slab of marble. It was commissioned in 1498 and was first unveiled in 1500.
I have now seen two incredible marble works by Michael Angelo, The statue of David and The Pieta, and it never ceases to amaze me at how incredible the definition and clarity of the work is. It blows my mind how this man was able to produce such emotion in a piece of stone when I can barely do this drawing on paper. The part that most impressed me was the clothing of the Virgin Mary. The way it is carved seems like her garments are really falling that way, and the light creates shadows on it as if it was real clothing, it is incredible. The veins in Jesus’ body really impressed me, if you look at his foot we see how they protrude, just like he would have originally.
Another aspect of this work is that he could not make any mistakes, if he chipped or carved to hard the work would be ruined; he had to have such meticulous concentration when doing any of these marble works. This man really was a genius and I feel like this work was something that was special to him. It says that he carved his name in the sash of Mary, and afterwards he said he let his emotions get the better of him and he would never carve his name again. Clearly this piece was close to his heart, and the more I stare at it the more I can see why.
The next piece I liked is also by the great Michael Angelo. It is the portrait of the devil in the Sistine chapel. The reason I like a lot of Michael Angelo’s work is because I see him as a revolutionary. When in Florence we saw the Doni Tondo, it was a piece showing Mary and the baby Jesus. Mary was seen with short hair, and was muscular, and instead of Jesus being a perfectly behaved child, he was seen climbing all over her. He did things differently and real, and put emotion into his work.
I enjoy how he depicted the demons and creatures of hell in comparison to the scenes of God with angels; I think it is quite funny how demons are shown as big scary things and angels are more feminine creatures, makes me chuckle to think that they triumph over the big bad beings of hell. I feel like Michael Angelo intends for some of his art to amuse people, some of the demons have the most ridiculous smiles and looks on their faces.
The story behind the painting of the devil most impressed me. When Biagio da Cesena, the papal master of ceremonies, made a comment that the paintings would be more fitting for a tavern wall than a chapel, he retaliated by giving the devil the face of Biagio da Cesena. Instead of making stuff nice to appease the people who were paying him and were in charge he decided to go against this. I feel like these days art suffers for lack of this spirit. It could be because of in the USA and first world countries there are not many life changing things that people feel they need to protest or stand up against. Michael Angelo stood up against the norms of his time and dared to be different.
I have now seen two incredible marble works by Michael Angelo, The statue of David and The Pieta, and it never ceases to amaze me at how incredible the definition and clarity of the work is. It blows my mind how this man was able to produce such emotion in a piece of stone when I can barely do this drawing on paper. The part that most impressed me was the clothing of the Virgin Mary. The way it is carved seems like her garments are really falling that way, and the light creates shadows on it as if it was real clothing, it is incredible. The veins in Jesus’ body really impressed me, if you look at his foot we see how they protrude, just like he would have originally.
Another aspect of this work is that he could not make any mistakes, if he chipped or carved to hard the work would be ruined; he had to have such meticulous concentration when doing any of these marble works. This man really was a genius and I feel like this work was something that was special to him. It says that he carved his name in the sash of Mary, and afterwards he said he let his emotions get the better of him and he would never carve his name again. Clearly this piece was close to his heart, and the more I stare at it the more I can see why.
The next piece I liked is also by the great Michael Angelo. It is the portrait of the devil in the Sistine chapel. The reason I like a lot of Michael Angelo’s work is because I see him as a revolutionary. When in Florence we saw the Doni Tondo, it was a piece showing Mary and the baby Jesus. Mary was seen with short hair, and was muscular, and instead of Jesus being a perfectly behaved child, he was seen climbing all over her. He did things differently and real, and put emotion into his work.
I enjoy how he depicted the demons and creatures of hell in comparison to the scenes of God with angels; I think it is quite funny how demons are shown as big scary things and angels are more feminine creatures, makes me chuckle to think that they triumph over the big bad beings of hell. I feel like Michael Angelo intends for some of his art to amuse people, some of the demons have the most ridiculous smiles and looks on their faces.
The story behind the painting of the devil most impressed me. When Biagio da Cesena, the papal master of ceremonies, made a comment that the paintings would be more fitting for a tavern wall than a chapel, he retaliated by giving the devil the face of Biagio da Cesena. Instead of making stuff nice to appease the people who were paying him and were in charge he decided to go against this. I feel like these days art suffers for lack of this spirit. It could be because of in the USA and first world countries there are not many life changing things that people feel they need to protest or stand up against. Michael Angelo stood up against the norms of his time and dared to be different.
Hum 225: 20/09
The Pieta by Michael Angelo was my favorite piece of art that we saw; it is located in St Peters Basilica in the Vatican City. It is a life size statue of the Virgin Mary holding her son Jesus in her arms and is made from a slab of marble. It was commissioned in 1498 and was first unveiled in 1500.
I have now seen two incredible marble works by Michael Angelo, The statue of David and The Pieta, and it never ceases to amaze me at how incredible the definition and clarity of the work is. It blows my mind how this man was able to produce such emotion in a piece of stone when I can barely do this drawing on paper. The part that most impressed me was the clothing of the Virgin Mary. The way it is carved seems like her garments are really falling that way, and the light creates shadows on it as if it was real clothing, it is incredible. The veins in Jesus’ body really impressed me, if you look at his foot we see how they protrude, just like he would have originally.
Another aspect of this work is that he could not make any mistakes, if he chipped or carved to hard the work would be ruined; he had to have such meticulous concentration when doing any of these marble works. This man really was a genius and I feel like this work was something that was special to him. It says that he carved his name in the sash of Mary, and afterwards he said he let his emotions get the better of him and he would never carve his name again. Clearly this piece was close to his heart, and the more I stare at it the more I can see why.
The next piece I liked is also by the great Michael Angelo. It is the portrait of the devil in the Sistine chapel. The reason I like a lot of Michael Angelo’s work is because I see him as a revolutionary. When in Florence we saw the Doni Tondo, it was a piece showing Mary and the baby Jesus. Mary was seen with short hair, and was muscular, and instead of Jesus being a perfectly behaved child, he was seen climbing all over her. He did things differently and real, and put emotion into his work.
I enjoy how he depicted the demons and creatures of hell in comparison to the scenes of God with angels; I think it is quite funny how demons are shown as big scary things and angels are more feminine creatures, makes me chuckle to think that they triumph over the big bad beings of hell. I feel like Michael Angelo intends for some of his art to amuse people, some of the demons have the most ridiculous smiles and looks on their faces.
The story behind the painting of the devil most impressed me. When Biagio da Cesena, the papal master of ceremonies, made a comment that the paintings would be more fitting for a tavern wall than a chapel, he retaliated by giving the devil the face of Biagio da Cesena. Instead of making stuff nice to appease the people who were paying him and were in charge he decided to go against this. I feel like these days art suffers for lack of this spirit. It could be because of in the USA and first world countries there are not many life changing things that people feel they need to protest or stand up against. Michael Angelo stood up against the norms of his time and dared to be different.
I have now seen two incredible marble works by Michael Angelo, The statue of David and The Pieta, and it never ceases to amaze me at how incredible the definition and clarity of the work is. It blows my mind how this man was able to produce such emotion in a piece of stone when I can barely do this drawing on paper. The part that most impressed me was the clothing of the Virgin Mary. The way it is carved seems like her garments are really falling that way, and the light creates shadows on it as if it was real clothing, it is incredible. The veins in Jesus’ body really impressed me, if you look at his foot we see how they protrude, just like he would have originally.
Another aspect of this work is that he could not make any mistakes, if he chipped or carved to hard the work would be ruined; he had to have such meticulous concentration when doing any of these marble works. This man really was a genius and I feel like this work was something that was special to him. It says that he carved his name in the sash of Mary, and afterwards he said he let his emotions get the better of him and he would never carve his name again. Clearly this piece was close to his heart, and the more I stare at it the more I can see why.
The next piece I liked is also by the great Michael Angelo. It is the portrait of the devil in the Sistine chapel. The reason I like a lot of Michael Angelo’s work is because I see him as a revolutionary. When in Florence we saw the Doni Tondo, it was a piece showing Mary and the baby Jesus. Mary was seen with short hair, and was muscular, and instead of Jesus being a perfectly behaved child, he was seen climbing all over her. He did things differently and real, and put emotion into his work.
I enjoy how he depicted the demons and creatures of hell in comparison to the scenes of God with angels; I think it is quite funny how demons are shown as big scary things and angels are more feminine creatures, makes me chuckle to think that they triumph over the big bad beings of hell. I feel like Michael Angelo intends for some of his art to amuse people, some of the demons have the most ridiculous smiles and looks on their faces.
The story behind the painting of the devil most impressed me. When Biagio da Cesena, the papal master of ceremonies, made a comment that the paintings would be more fitting for a tavern wall than a chapel, he retaliated by giving the devil the face of Biagio da Cesena. Instead of making stuff nice to appease the people who were paying him and were in charge he decided to go against this. I feel like these days art suffers for lack of this spirit. It could be because of in the USA and first world countries there are not many life changing things that people feel they need to protest or stand up against. Michael Angelo stood up against the norms of his time and dared to be different.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
314 Journal 15/09
The ghetto is a notorious term that many people these days associate with poverty stricken, crime infested areas, teaming with drug dealers and prostitutes. Even though these are characteristics that were and are present in ghettos, there is more to it. Especially in the Jewish Ghetto and other ghettos of it’s kind, where people were forced to live in this certain area.
When people are not free to go and leave as they please, and have restrictions on what kind of jobs they have, they are being set up for failure. We are all made differently, with a different set of skills, and if yours do not fit into the prescribed jobs available, what option do you have?
I am currently reading ‘Kaffir Boy’, which is set in one of South Africa’s infamous ghettos, Alexandra, and I am learning about how the men are hardened from all the trauma they have to suffer, the kids see no point in school and a future as they are fighting simply for survival, and how they perceive people outside of this ghetto and how people perceive them.
Ghettos are breeding pits for stereotypes. When people are forced to live in a certain area or come from the ghetto, others looking in can believe whatever they want about the people, that they are lazy, alcoholics, criminals because they don’t come into contact with these people in a positive environment. When everyone is telling you that you are these things your whole life, it is hard to believe that you aren’t. It works the same way in reverse, people in the ghettos assume crazy notions about ALL people outside the ghetto, and the result is hatred brews in people’s hearts.
Ghettos truly are terrible things, and it is extremely sad to see the cycle of hate and malice that has been going on for so many centuries. So often people see only the action instead of taking into account the circumstances. It is cheesy to say, but perhaps if both parties stepped out of their comfort zones and came together to try see things from another point of view, we would accept our differences, use our strengths and work together to break this cycle.
When people are not free to go and leave as they please, and have restrictions on what kind of jobs they have, they are being set up for failure. We are all made differently, with a different set of skills, and if yours do not fit into the prescribed jobs available, what option do you have?
I am currently reading ‘Kaffir Boy’, which is set in one of South Africa’s infamous ghettos, Alexandra, and I am learning about how the men are hardened from all the trauma they have to suffer, the kids see no point in school and a future as they are fighting simply for survival, and how they perceive people outside of this ghetto and how people perceive them.
Ghettos are breeding pits for stereotypes. When people are forced to live in a certain area or come from the ghetto, others looking in can believe whatever they want about the people, that they are lazy, alcoholics, criminals because they don’t come into contact with these people in a positive environment. When everyone is telling you that you are these things your whole life, it is hard to believe that you aren’t. It works the same way in reverse, people in the ghettos assume crazy notions about ALL people outside the ghetto, and the result is hatred brews in people’s hearts.
Ghettos truly are terrible things, and it is extremely sad to see the cycle of hate and malice that has been going on for so many centuries. So often people see only the action instead of taking into account the circumstances. It is cheesy to say, but perhaps if both parties stepped out of their comfort zones and came together to try see things from another point of view, we would accept our differences, use our strengths and work together to break this cycle.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Stories and Traditions 7/9
The piazza is essential to Italian culture. An Italian city without a piazza is like a zebra without stripes, still cool but not as fun. It is the magnetic force that brings people of all kinds together, young and old, artistic and athletic, all are drawn by the wonder that is the piazza.
There are many common features in most Italian piazzas. Very often there is a fountain, apart from being aesthetically pleasing, it is used very practically, as a place for people to relax and cool down. What I like about the fountain being in the middle is that most roads lead to it, so people from all different places and walks of life are meeting up in that one spot. Churches are also prominent in the piazzas. The general feel I get from piazzas is that they are a place for people of all kinds, and even though the prominence of churches may not prove this, I think people of all religions can find a way to appreciate the art and architecture.
Food is a big part of piazzas, and almost everywhere in Italy. This is definitely one of the most magnetic forces behind piazzas and Italy. It is what brings people of different generations to the same place. Old people come to share a meal and wine; young people come for a slice of pizza and gelato. Nonetheless old and new co-exist.
I think that this is the spirit that Italy of today is built on. With all the rich history and greatness that the country possesses, they still have to forge their own path in today’s modern world. Ancient and modern have to co-exist and compliment one another, in the same way we see the piazzas of Italy and the people that inhabit them do this.
There are many common features in most Italian piazzas. Very often there is a fountain, apart from being aesthetically pleasing, it is used very practically, as a place for people to relax and cool down. What I like about the fountain being in the middle is that most roads lead to it, so people from all different places and walks of life are meeting up in that one spot. Churches are also prominent in the piazzas. The general feel I get from piazzas is that they are a place for people of all kinds, and even though the prominence of churches may not prove this, I think people of all religions can find a way to appreciate the art and architecture.
Food is a big part of piazzas, and almost everywhere in Italy. This is definitely one of the most magnetic forces behind piazzas and Italy. It is what brings people of different generations to the same place. Old people come to share a meal and wine; young people come for a slice of pizza and gelato. Nonetheless old and new co-exist.
I think that this is the spirit that Italy of today is built on. With all the rich history and greatness that the country possesses, they still have to forge their own path in today’s modern world. Ancient and modern have to co-exist and compliment one another, in the same way we see the piazzas of Italy and the people that inhabit them do this.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Is it a bird, is it a plane, its Georgio Perlasca
What is an authentic hero to me? We all have our obvious definitions and examples of heroes. Someone who is brave and fearless and risks their lives for people every day, people like fireman and policeman. These people are phenomenal and deserve to be hailed as heroes but to me the character trait that really makes a hero is the tremendous self sacrifice they have to make.
One element that I think is present in all authentic heroes is the willingness to humble themselves and sacrifice for something bigger. Many people think you have to be born brave, and strong, or be bitten by a radioactive spider and get superpowers to be a hero, but that’s not true. We see heroes in single parents who sacrifice to provide for their children. We see heroes in martyrs who sacrificed their lives and endured great pain, not for glory or to be recognized, but to stand up for what they believe in. We see heroes in people who unselfishly put others first, even when they are receiving nothing from it or even may be seen in a negative way. In the latest Batman movie, 'The Dark Night', we see just this. Without giving to much away Batman accepts blame for things he did not do, all so that people would still have hope in Gotham and not give up on it. He would rather have been seen as a villain, even though he was doing so much for the city, then have people give up fighting for Gotham City. Out of all of his powerful gadgets and special abilities, i think this character trait was his most powerful.
Georgio Perlasca was not a Jew; he had no reason to defend these people being persecuted. He was not going to get any great reward for doing what he did, but still he decided this extermination was wrong and he stepped out and risked everything to help. Many times we see ‘heroes’ that have ulterior motives, politicians helping people for the publicity. Perlasca decided he had to do something, when he could have just gone to a neutral country and lived a safe life. He could have been ignorant to everything that was going on around him. A story that I read about Perlasca that really amazed me was one about him standing by the loading dock, watching German soldiers and Hungarian police push long lines of men, women, and children toward cars to be taken to death camps. As described by Commonweal, "Suddenly [Perlasca] rushes forward, grabs two young boys by the collar, drags them back down the platform, and throws them into the back seat of his car." At that point, a German soldier ran over, pulled out his revolver, and motioned to the man to return the boys. Perlasca refused, shouting. "'This car is foreign territory. The boys are under Spanish jurisdiction and you'll be violating international law if you so much as touch them (Myhero.com).'Had Perlasca merely ended with just this incredible fete in his life, he still would be a hero. I am positive that there were others like him who got caught and were killed. The fact that he carried on saving people even after such a close encounter challenges me, and what challenges me even more is the fact that there were definitely many more people like Perlasca, who helped only a few people, or died while trying to help. And while there names may have been forgotten, I like to believe their selfless acts and heroic spirit continues to inspire others.
One element that I think is present in all authentic heroes is the willingness to humble themselves and sacrifice for something bigger. Many people think you have to be born brave, and strong, or be bitten by a radioactive spider and get superpowers to be a hero, but that’s not true. We see heroes in single parents who sacrifice to provide for their children. We see heroes in martyrs who sacrificed their lives and endured great pain, not for glory or to be recognized, but to stand up for what they believe in. We see heroes in people who unselfishly put others first, even when they are receiving nothing from it or even may be seen in a negative way. In the latest Batman movie, 'The Dark Night', we see just this. Without giving to much away Batman accepts blame for things he did not do, all so that people would still have hope in Gotham and not give up on it. He would rather have been seen as a villain, even though he was doing so much for the city, then have people give up fighting for Gotham City. Out of all of his powerful gadgets and special abilities, i think this character trait was his most powerful.
Georgio Perlasca was not a Jew; he had no reason to defend these people being persecuted. He was not going to get any great reward for doing what he did, but still he decided this extermination was wrong and he stepped out and risked everything to help. Many times we see ‘heroes’ that have ulterior motives, politicians helping people for the publicity. Perlasca decided he had to do something, when he could have just gone to a neutral country and lived a safe life. He could have been ignorant to everything that was going on around him. A story that I read about Perlasca that really amazed me was one about him standing by the loading dock, watching German soldiers and Hungarian police push long lines of men, women, and children toward cars to be taken to death camps. As described by Commonweal, "Suddenly [Perlasca] rushes forward, grabs two young boys by the collar, drags them back down the platform, and throws them into the back seat of his car." At that point, a German soldier ran over, pulled out his revolver, and motioned to the man to return the boys. Perlasca refused, shouting. "'This car is foreign territory. The boys are under Spanish jurisdiction and you'll be violating international law if you so much as touch them (Myhero.com).'Had Perlasca merely ended with just this incredible fete in his life, he still would be a hero. I am positive that there were others like him who got caught and were killed. The fact that he carried on saving people even after such a close encounter challenges me, and what challenges me even more is the fact that there were definitely many more people like Perlasca, who helped only a few people, or died while trying to help. And while there names may have been forgotten, I like to believe their selfless acts and heroic spirit continues to inspire others.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Art 225- Journal 3
The Basilica of San Giovanni in Laterano has so much to see. The statues, carvings in the wall, it is all incredible. However, what impressed me the most was the roof of the nave. The Basilica of San Giovanni in Laterano was built by Constantine the Great in the 4th century; it was the first church to be built in Rome. The ceiling stretches across the nave and is covered with gold. Gold that was brought from America by the Italian native Christopher Columbus.
In 1646, the interior of the Basilica was renovated however they wanted to preserve the ceiling and the floor, so those were untouched. The ceiling was a work by Flaminio Boulanger and showed the coats of arms of Pope Pius IV and Pope Pius V(Wikipedia).
The gold of the ceiling really makes it stand out against the white of the marble. This use of different colors like this really provides an almost supernatural feeling as one enters for the first time. The bit of light that does shine through really lights the room up as it bounces of the gold roof and the intricate designs keep ones neck strained back as you can’t take your eyes off of it.
The Catacombs of Domitilla are spread over 15 km of caves. Apart from being the first underground basilica they have various art works within the caves. My personal favorite was the one of Jesus with his disciples. One had to bend down and look at this to see it properly.
The artist of this is unknown but historians date it back to the 2nd century (Wikipedia). The thing I liked most about this painting is the passion. It is not a commissioned piece of art, or a painting someone is doing in a lofty apartment. It is a raw expression of what that person was feeling, done underground so many years ago. It is similar to today’s graffiti.
Graffiti is an expression of mostly people that are growing up in those streets. It’s raw and controversial and often not respected as art. None the less it is an expression. This is why I loved the fresco in the catacombs. It is not the technique or style that makes it great, but the emotion.
In 1646, the interior of the Basilica was renovated however they wanted to preserve the ceiling and the floor, so those were untouched. The ceiling was a work by Flaminio Boulanger and showed the coats of arms of Pope Pius IV and Pope Pius V(Wikipedia).
The gold of the ceiling really makes it stand out against the white of the marble. This use of different colors like this really provides an almost supernatural feeling as one enters for the first time. The bit of light that does shine through really lights the room up as it bounces of the gold roof and the intricate designs keep ones neck strained back as you can’t take your eyes off of it.
The Catacombs of Domitilla are spread over 15 km of caves. Apart from being the first underground basilica they have various art works within the caves. My personal favorite was the one of Jesus with his disciples. One had to bend down and look at this to see it properly.
The artist of this is unknown but historians date it back to the 2nd century (Wikipedia). The thing I liked most about this painting is the passion. It is not a commissioned piece of art, or a painting someone is doing in a lofty apartment. It is a raw expression of what that person was feeling, done underground so many years ago. It is similar to today’s graffiti.
Graffiti is an expression of mostly people that are growing up in those streets. It’s raw and controversial and often not respected as art. None the less it is an expression. This is why I loved the fresco in the catacombs. It is not the technique or style that makes it great, but the emotion.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Rome and Jerusalem 1/09
Does history contribute/bolster faith, or does the past limit faith? This is a question that can only have a very personal answer, where none are right or wrong. When thinking about such difficult questions i always like to dissect the key words, these being contribute/bolster and limit.
Dictionary.com says bolster is to support, reinforce or strengthen. This implies a sense of a base of faith already being in place. So the question is not saying that history defines the faith, it is asking if it reinforces and strengthens it. I will have to look at it critically from both ends of the spectrum.
One can definitely see how the past bolsters ones faith. When we are going through a hard time and feeling discouraged, we open our Bibles to read of Moses and the Jews and their deliverance from slavery in Egypt. This history in the way it is told for us helps reassure our faith in God and in the fact that he has our back and will deliver us from our 'Egypt'.
Limit is defined as a confining or restricting object, agent, or influence (Dictionary.com). Let us now look again at the story of Moses, as I am reading it i see how God spoke to him through the burning bush. In my mind I imagine a audible voice from heaven, which it very well could have been. But i then wonder why have i not heard a clearly audible voice from God, or seen such great signs such as the burning bush or parting of the sea. This makes me question the validity of the texts and sometimes question these acts that have previously bolstered my faith.
In all religions I think there are moments that bolster faith and moments that limit faith. It is very hard to find the truth in this faith, because your truth is different to mine. The way i grew up moulds my truths while your experiences do the same for yours. It seems to me that faith, like life is a bit of a roller coaster experience. When we first start out, our faith my be limited by the simplest of things, but as we create our own history and draw from the history of others over time we see how God has brought us through our 'Egypt's' or spoken to us in our own unique 'burning bushes' and history does indeed bolster our faith overall.
Dictionary.com says bolster is to support, reinforce or strengthen. This implies a sense of a base of faith already being in place. So the question is not saying that history defines the faith, it is asking if it reinforces and strengthens it. I will have to look at it critically from both ends of the spectrum.
One can definitely see how the past bolsters ones faith. When we are going through a hard time and feeling discouraged, we open our Bibles to read of Moses and the Jews and their deliverance from slavery in Egypt. This history in the way it is told for us helps reassure our faith in God and in the fact that he has our back and will deliver us from our 'Egypt'.
Limit is defined as a confining or restricting object, agent, or influence (Dictionary.com). Let us now look again at the story of Moses, as I am reading it i see how God spoke to him through the burning bush. In my mind I imagine a audible voice from heaven, which it very well could have been. But i then wonder why have i not heard a clearly audible voice from God, or seen such great signs such as the burning bush or parting of the sea. This makes me question the validity of the texts and sometimes question these acts that have previously bolstered my faith.
In all religions I think there are moments that bolster faith and moments that limit faith. It is very hard to find the truth in this faith, because your truth is different to mine. The way i grew up moulds my truths while your experiences do the same for yours. It seems to me that faith, like life is a bit of a roller coaster experience. When we first start out, our faith my be limited by the simplest of things, but as we create our own history and draw from the history of others over time we see how God has brought us through our 'Egypt's' or spoken to us in our own unique 'burning bushes' and history does indeed bolster our faith overall.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Rome and Jerusalem #1
Rome of that day represented power, not the power of having an almighty God behind them, but power through what they themselves could accomplish. “It was appropriate for the Romans to depend for their safety and general welfare, not on their fortifications, but on their arms and own valor (Rome and Jerusalem pg 39).” This is a perspective that is quite the opposite of that of the Jews.
The Jews represented more of a spiritual power. A faith in God that said, “and if you walk in my ways and obey my statutes and commands as David your father did, I will give you a long life (1 Kings 3:14)." In Deuteronomy 28:1 it says something similar, “Now it shall be, if you diligently obey the Lord your God, being careful to do all His commandments which I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth.” So even though they weren’t just sitting back and expecting God to do everything, they had a faith that proclaimed God above all men instead of putting God on the same level.
This is a complete clash of differences and it was no wonder there was this fighting between the nations. I think this fight has carried on through out the ages, sometimes in a just as violent matter, other times not.
I believe this same battle is seen in the fight to separate church and state. This refers to the distance in the relationship between organized religion on the one hand and the nation state on the other (Wikipedia). This dates back all the way to the medieval times when the monarch ruled both the Crown and Church by divine right (Wikipedia). This is one of the most popular debates in America today. “The wall of separation between church and state” said by Thomas Jefferson is one of the most used quotes in this debate. Some believe him to have said this to protect the church from the state restricting their religious freedom while others believe it to be the other way. We have seen instances of people being fired from their jobs for sharing their faith in the work place, with this idea of church and state being separate very prevalent. We have seen prayer being removed from public schools and the uproar that this has brought.
There is an on going battle with one side putting God above everything like the Jews did and the other side wanting a more secular or logical base where religion had no part. Thankfully this parallel is less violent but still is very heated.
The Jews represented more of a spiritual power. A faith in God that said, “and if you walk in my ways and obey my statutes and commands as David your father did, I will give you a long life (1 Kings 3:14)." In Deuteronomy 28:1 it says something similar, “Now it shall be, if you diligently obey the Lord your God, being careful to do all His commandments which I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth.” So even though they weren’t just sitting back and expecting God to do everything, they had a faith that proclaimed God above all men instead of putting God on the same level.
This is a complete clash of differences and it was no wonder there was this fighting between the nations. I think this fight has carried on through out the ages, sometimes in a just as violent matter, other times not.
I believe this same battle is seen in the fight to separate church and state. This refers to the distance in the relationship between organized religion on the one hand and the nation state on the other (Wikipedia). This dates back all the way to the medieval times when the monarch ruled both the Crown and Church by divine right (Wikipedia). This is one of the most popular debates in America today. “The wall of separation between church and state” said by Thomas Jefferson is one of the most used quotes in this debate. Some believe him to have said this to protect the church from the state restricting their religious freedom while others believe it to be the other way. We have seen instances of people being fired from their jobs for sharing their faith in the work place, with this idea of church and state being separate very prevalent. We have seen prayer being removed from public schools and the uproar that this has brought.
There is an on going battle with one side putting God above everything like the Jews did and the other side wanting a more secular or logical base where religion had no part. Thankfully this parallel is less violent but still is very heated.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Hum 225: Art and Culture of Rome 8/30
The Appian Way was one of the first and most important roads built in Rome. It is named after Appius Claudius Caecus, The Roman censor who began and completed the first section of the road. The road began in the Roman Forum and stretched all the way to Brindisi (Wikipedia). It was an outstanding 375 km long upon its completion (Blue Book pg 485). The Appian Way began as a leveled dirt road, stones and mortar were then laid. The Romans being the master builders that they were then topped the road with tight fitting stones to provide a flat surface. It was even said that a knife could not fit between the stones, they were fitted so well (Wikipedia).
As i was riding my bicycle i wondered what possessed the Romans to build this road, upon reading about the Appian way i found out that it was first built with military aspirations. It made it easier for the Romans to keep look out and ambush attackers. We actually saw one of the look out posts that were used in ancient times. The Battle of Anzio in World War II was a more recent battle that took place along that road (Wikipedia). However the road was used for many other things I learnt as we road along it. It was even the sight of the men's marathon during the 1960 Summer Olympics.
There were also many tombstones and monuments on the side of the road, i found this quite strange but the more I thought about it, it was not strange at all. Friday nights in the summer I would take the train and emerge in Times Square, New York City. The first thing that caught my eye was the enormous poster of Jay Z. His face was plastered across a skyscraper. Even though part of the purpose of this billboard is advertising, I also see it as a tribute to how great/successful Jay Z is. The tombstones on the side of the road did exactly this. As people walked past they would marvel at the different tombstones and say to one another how great that person must have been. Their tombstones were our billboards to how much that person had accomplished.
The Medusa Head is a work of Gian Lorenzo Bernini and was created between 1630 and 1640, it did however have to be restored. The marble head was 68 cm (26 3/4 in.) in height and stands proudly in the Palazzo dei Conservatori in the Capitoline Museum.
When we look at other sculptures of Medusa we can see how very unique Bernini's sculpture is. The original Medusa by Phidias, a Greek in the 5th century BC shows a very calm, beautiful monster, a bit of a contradiction. Someone with snakes for hair that can turn people to stone with their eyes in my mind is not calm and emotionless. That is why Bernini's sculpture is so much more realistic, it shows anguish and pain.
What made Bernini take this classic and change it? I would think it had to do with the time that he lived in and the art that was going on during this time. Bernini was a prominent artist in the Baroque movement. This is an artistic style that is characterized by dynamic movement, over emotion and self-confident rhetoric (Wikipedia). The Baroque style was so popular because of the support of the Roman Catholic Church, they decided that art and religion should send similar messages and commissioned a lot of works. We can clearly see the effect of the Baroque style on the sculpture when we compare it to the previous Medusa from so many years ago.
As i was riding my bicycle i wondered what possessed the Romans to build this road, upon reading about the Appian way i found out that it was first built with military aspirations. It made it easier for the Romans to keep look out and ambush attackers. We actually saw one of the look out posts that were used in ancient times. The Battle of Anzio in World War II was a more recent battle that took place along that road (Wikipedia). However the road was used for many other things I learnt as we road along it. It was even the sight of the men's marathon during the 1960 Summer Olympics.
There were also many tombstones and monuments on the side of the road, i found this quite strange but the more I thought about it, it was not strange at all. Friday nights in the summer I would take the train and emerge in Times Square, New York City. The first thing that caught my eye was the enormous poster of Jay Z. His face was plastered across a skyscraper. Even though part of the purpose of this billboard is advertising, I also see it as a tribute to how great/successful Jay Z is. The tombstones on the side of the road did exactly this. As people walked past they would marvel at the different tombstones and say to one another how great that person must have been. Their tombstones were our billboards to how much that person had accomplished.
The Medusa Head is a work of Gian Lorenzo Bernini and was created between 1630 and 1640, it did however have to be restored. The marble head was 68 cm (26 3/4 in.) in height and stands proudly in the Palazzo dei Conservatori in the Capitoline Museum.
When we look at other sculptures of Medusa we can see how very unique Bernini's sculpture is. The original Medusa by Phidias, a Greek in the 5th century BC shows a very calm, beautiful monster, a bit of a contradiction. Someone with snakes for hair that can turn people to stone with their eyes in my mind is not calm and emotionless. That is why Bernini's sculpture is so much more realistic, it shows anguish and pain.
What made Bernini take this classic and change it? I would think it had to do with the time that he lived in and the art that was going on during this time. Bernini was a prominent artist in the Baroque movement. This is an artistic style that is characterized by dynamic movement, over emotion and self-confident rhetoric (Wikipedia). The Baroque style was so popular because of the support of the Roman Catholic Church, they decided that art and religion should send similar messages and commissioned a lot of works. We can clearly see the effect of the Baroque style on the sculpture when we compare it to the previous Medusa from so many years ago.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
325 Rome Stories and Traditions 08/24
Dictionary.com defines exhilarating as," to enliven, invigorate or stimulate." I have tried to think of ways that Rome as a city has done these things. I have lived in New York City so the hustle and bustle I am used to. I am from a city with a lot of crime so being on the look out for danger, or having our 'antenna' up as Danilo says is something I have grown up with. The artwork and ruins we have seen I like but have not taken my breath away, that was until today.
Walking through the Capitoline Hill museum I saw how this great empire came into being in vivid detail. I heard the stories and myths of Romulus and Remus. How the Romans did not have any women in their village and kidnapped another villages, and then joined and became bigger. The pinnacle of the day for me was the view of the Roman Forum. We had been in the Roman Forum before but it was only when we standing on top of the hill that I could see the true magnitude of the greatness of Rome. The most exhilarating part of all of that for me is the fact that it all started as a small village.
Oppressive is defined by dictionary.com as, " causing discomfort by being excessive, intense, elaborate" or "burdensome, unjustly harsh, or tyrannical." Oppressive could be a perfect word to describe Rome over the course of its existence, with these two definitions. Ancient times most definitely has some unjustly laws, tyrannical leaders, and harsh punishments. Modern times could be oppressive because of the intense personalities of the people.
I tried to think of ways Rome is oppressive to the traveler that is unlike any other city I have been in. So, the language barrier is out, the hustle and bustle is out and the other common complaints. What I imagine to be oppressive may seem foolish, but I feel that the vast amounts of museums and sights located in such a small vicinity are oppressive, oppressive to appreciation. When coming here, I had some idea of the great works of art that I would encounter. I was prepared to be blown away, and yes the Coliseum did not disappoint, or the view of the Roman Forum from on top of Capitoline Hill. However I have seen churches or artworks in New York and even Cleveland that have seemed grander at the time then some of the ones here. When I picture the places separately, these wonders of Rome win hands down. So how do those places seem to have had more of an impact on me at the time? I believe that because of the huge quantity of all these fountains, piazzas and churches it dulls the experience and distracts from how glorious they actually are. The same monument in any other part of the world would be marveled at, but in Rome it seems a little more average. It makes me think of the term ‘relative poverty’ that I learnt in sociology class. Some people believe they are hard off and living in ‘poverty’ because the people around them have so much, but in fact they do have a lot. So because of the many ‘riches’ Rome has, its leaves some of the monuments and art looking poverty stricken.
Nonetheless Rome is a very intriguing city to study, as it is one of the few cities where we can have such a clear view of past and present.
Walking through the Capitoline Hill museum I saw how this great empire came into being in vivid detail. I heard the stories and myths of Romulus and Remus. How the Romans did not have any women in their village and kidnapped another villages, and then joined and became bigger. The pinnacle of the day for me was the view of the Roman Forum. We had been in the Roman Forum before but it was only when we standing on top of the hill that I could see the true magnitude of the greatness of Rome. The most exhilarating part of all of that for me is the fact that it all started as a small village.
Oppressive is defined by dictionary.com as, " causing discomfort by being excessive, intense, elaborate" or "burdensome, unjustly harsh, or tyrannical." Oppressive could be a perfect word to describe Rome over the course of its existence, with these two definitions. Ancient times most definitely has some unjustly laws, tyrannical leaders, and harsh punishments. Modern times could be oppressive because of the intense personalities of the people.
I tried to think of ways Rome is oppressive to the traveler that is unlike any other city I have been in. So, the language barrier is out, the hustle and bustle is out and the other common complaints. What I imagine to be oppressive may seem foolish, but I feel that the vast amounts of museums and sights located in such a small vicinity are oppressive, oppressive to appreciation. When coming here, I had some idea of the great works of art that I would encounter. I was prepared to be blown away, and yes the Coliseum did not disappoint, or the view of the Roman Forum from on top of Capitoline Hill. However I have seen churches or artworks in New York and even Cleveland that have seemed grander at the time then some of the ones here. When I picture the places separately, these wonders of Rome win hands down. So how do those places seem to have had more of an impact on me at the time? I believe that because of the huge quantity of all these fountains, piazzas and churches it dulls the experience and distracts from how glorious they actually are. The same monument in any other part of the world would be marveled at, but in Rome it seems a little more average. It makes me think of the term ‘relative poverty’ that I learnt in sociology class. Some people believe they are hard off and living in ‘poverty’ because the people around them have so much, but in fact they do have a lot. So because of the many ‘riches’ Rome has, its leaves some of the monuments and art looking poverty stricken.
Nonetheless Rome is a very intriguing city to study, as it is one of the few cities where we can have such a clear view of past and present.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Hum 225: Art and Culture of Rome 8/17
The Roman Forum was one of the favorite things that I have seen since being here. The ancient places and ruins were quite incredible. The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina in the eastern part of the Roman Forum really caught my eye. It is made from peperino blocks and was originally faced with marble.
This is one of the best-preserved temples in the forum; the Senate built it in the memory of the Empress Faustina after she died in 141AD.
There are 10 Corinthian columns surrounding this temple. Usually pillars represent strength and this case proved true. There are grooves around the top of the columns that are said to be from a medieval attack where they tried to dismantle the temple.
The temple was converted into the church of San Lorenzo before the 12th century. There is a large cross on the top, which I see as representing the conversion to Roman Catholic and the victory of the pagan gods.
Wikipedia says, “The rich bas-reliefs of the frieze under the cornice, of garlanded griffons and candelabri, were often copied from the sixteenth through the nineteenth centuries.” We see how the designs have been taken from and used throughout the centuries and how the building has been virtually indestructible over the years, even under attack.
Another part that I really liked was the Arch of Titus. It is also in the eastern part of the Roman Forum at the highest point of Via Sacra. It is made from Pentalic marble and later repaired with travertine.
The 15m high arch was built to commemorate the victory of the Romans over the Jews. It is the oldest surviving Roman arch and has vivid sculptures inside it. The one panel depicts the triumphal procession as the Romans carry the spoils from Jerusalem. They are carrying the silver trumpets and the Table of the Shewbread and there is a menorah, I feel this shows that they really took the heart of the Jewish people. The other panel shows Titus in a chariot accompanied by the Goddess Victoria and the Goddess Roma.
The procession is marching in the same direction that the troops would have done so back then and is right before the road, sacra via, which they would have rode down to go and sacrifice the spoils to their gods.
The meaning that we take from the carvings and the detail that they have is incredible to me. Even as the oldest arch in Rome it still maintains the great detail for the most part.
This is one of the best-preserved temples in the forum; the Senate built it in the memory of the Empress Faustina after she died in 141AD.
There are 10 Corinthian columns surrounding this temple. Usually pillars represent strength and this case proved true. There are grooves around the top of the columns that are said to be from a medieval attack where they tried to dismantle the temple.
The temple was converted into the church of San Lorenzo before the 12th century. There is a large cross on the top, which I see as representing the conversion to Roman Catholic and the victory of the pagan gods.
Wikipedia says, “The rich bas-reliefs of the frieze under the cornice, of garlanded griffons and candelabri, were often copied from the sixteenth through the nineteenth centuries.” We see how the designs have been taken from and used throughout the centuries and how the building has been virtually indestructible over the years, even under attack.
Another part that I really liked was the Arch of Titus. It is also in the eastern part of the Roman Forum at the highest point of Via Sacra. It is made from Pentalic marble and later repaired with travertine.
The 15m high arch was built to commemorate the victory of the Romans over the Jews. It is the oldest surviving Roman arch and has vivid sculptures inside it. The one panel depicts the triumphal procession as the Romans carry the spoils from Jerusalem. They are carrying the silver trumpets and the Table of the Shewbread and there is a menorah, I feel this shows that they really took the heart of the Jewish people. The other panel shows Titus in a chariot accompanied by the Goddess Victoria and the Goddess Roma.
The procession is marching in the same direction that the troops would have done so back then and is right before the road, sacra via, which they would have rode down to go and sacrifice the spoils to their gods.
The meaning that we take from the carvings and the detail that they have is incredible to me. Even as the oldest arch in Rome it still maintains the great detail for the most part.
Blog 1- Rome: Stories and Traditions 08/18
We started by sitting outside with the sun falling on our faces, this is the best way to start any semester. We then discussed some things that I thought would not really affect the way I saw things that day, but I was wrong. Realizing the many different ways people see things and getting past that WOW factor and looking deeper was probably the most important to me.
When we first saw the Colleseum and our lovely tour guide painted the picture for us of what this place used to be, it was incredible. Even more incredible to me was the comments I heard from the peers around me. Some spoke about the barbarity of the people and why they would do those things to the animals and each other, others commented on the fact that women and children were made to sit in the worst seats, while others saw the incredible accomplishment it was that the Romans had built these monuments in the time they lived. The mornings class helped me to try consider the different perspectives and not just disregard them because I did not agree. I think it was valuable to consider all the different peoples point of views.
I am realizing that history is not only a cool story or something to be marveled at; it is something that we need to analyze and learn from. Just as we took much architectural advancement from the Romans we should look to what led to these 'holes in the walls' and learn from it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)