Guess they’ve never seen all of the statues of Athena, Artemis and Aphrodite. You don’t get as many nude female statues because it was usually considered obscene for women to be naked in public.
But the Greek male statues were fully nude and depicted ripped mortal men because they were made in line with Aristotle’s idea of good art being educational. Those were arguably the marble version of “git gud, scrub”.
If there were more male “perfect” body statues at the time, which we can’t establish because many have been lost over the millennia, it might actually be evidence that men were considered less attractive and they needed more body shaming to fix it?
It’s possible that it is a more modern idea that we’ve attributed to being much earlier, that does happen a lot, but I’m inclined to think it’s not entirely baseless.
We know for example that the nude Aphrodite of Knidos by Praxiteles caused enough of a stir to become a tourist destination, and even she had a conveniently positioned hand covering her goods. Kore statues always had clothes on too, unlike their male counterparts.
I could maybe buy the possibility that almost all of the nude women sculptures were stolen and later destroyed, either intentionally or accidentally, but that doesn’t quite work either. To not find any older nude sculptures in modern times, plus the odd detail that none of the nude ones we do have (copies, admittedly, and I don’t know all the statues either) have anything other than Barbie-smooth instead of even a delicate line suggesting labia… seems odd for an art culture that progressively got more caught up with hyper realism.
They did get nuder and more realistic with time, but we’ve got nothing from the archaic period without at least a skirt on, usually more.
Also they’re depicted with small pps because that body part was associated with savagery iirc. If we had the same trend today they would probably all have underwear with a huge bulge because that’s where puritanism and male beauty standards are currently.
The penis thing is pretty hotly debated, but savagery comes pretty close to my understanding of the theory you mention. It’s not a hugely different concept from some of the manosphere stuff you find today though.
Basically the idea was (it’s theorized) that thinking with your dick leads to making hasty and bad decisions, but you want to be like the cool smart intellectual philosopher rhetorician dudes ruling society who are strong enough to control their urges. You want to be the civilized powerful master strategist, not the uncivilized weak-willed destructive glutton. So… because art needs to be about reality and be educational (there’s no place for that creative abstract shit), we’re going to de-emphasize the body part associated with urges that are difficult to control. These are powerful rational dudes afterall.
The biggest difference with modern manosphere bullshit is maybe the part where they shrunk the pps on the ripped marble dudes to make that point. Instead we get… social media statue and peacock “science” analogies.
Phrasing. But yes, some of them - they seemed to prefer making plaster and metal fig leaves thankfully. Michelangelo wasn’t thrilled about being told to change his work either. Some of them were whacked off earlier than the Catholics, and some were whacked off by the Vatican even as late as the 1850s in “The Great Castration”.
Many of the lost appendages were accidental though, natural disasters and the like did a lot of amputation and decapitation, to the point where there are entire catalogue methods for mismatched heads on statues.
I think Nemesis is Roman, but probably a copy of a Greek statue. I might have chosen to forget because the “restoration” work on her head breaks my heart - but I know that’s a common problem. Such a pity because the drapery is gorgeous.
Looking at this Diana/Artemis, who was much luckier than most statues by having her original head reattached, you can see how different it is. The proportions make much more sense.
Image text description below image:
Photo of a marble statue of Artemis (aka Diana), which lives at the Louvre. Artemis is mid-step reaching for an arrow in the quiver on her back. In her other hand she’s pulling on the antlers of a small deer that she has caught. She’s wearing a short and practical belted tunic (chiton) appropriate for hunting, functional sandals, and an equally pragmatic hairstyle with her wavy locks in an up-do. Her arms and legs are neither skinny nor super muscly, they’re very average looking. But, being a goddess, she’s got a tiara. Not an ostentatious tiara, a simple solid tiara. A utility tiara, if you will. And being a female goddess, you can still see her nips pushing on the intricate drapery of her chiton. She’s clearly got some sex appeal carved in, but the statue is of a capable person who is independently getting shit done.
I love her because she basically looks like the kind of woman a modern conservative commentator would condemn for subverting gender roles. Also with a proportional head.
the hardest part of conservation is learning how to do it. like, i play saxophone and the instruments literally die and need expensive if you go too long without playing. how to take care of a sax? make sure your mouth is clean (like, rinse it out with water at least) before you play. ABSOLUTELY do not eat anything or drink anything other than water (not even flavored water bullshit) while playing unless you want to go brush your teeth before picking your sax up again. don’t leave your spit swab in while it’s in the case even though it fits so perfect in there, and play it regularly (like at least once a week but once a day is better) to make sure the cork doesn’t literally die. so sax conservation boils down to playing often and keeping your mouth clean.
guess how i ruined my first sax dudes. it was not doing this shit above.
Guess they’ve never seen all of the statues of Athena, Artemis and Aphrodite. You don’t get as many nude female statues because it was usually considered obscene for women to be naked in public.
But the Greek male statues were fully nude and depicted ripped mortal men because they were made in line with Aristotle’s idea of good art being educational. Those were arguably the marble version of “git gud, scrub”.
If there were more male “perfect” body statues at the time, which we can’t establish because many have been lost over the millennia, it might actually be evidence that men were considered less attractive and they needed more body shaming to fix it?
eh idk i’m pretty sure that’s an opinion that started in england, much later, not in ancient greece
It’s possible that it is a more modern idea that we’ve attributed to being much earlier, that does happen a lot, but I’m inclined to think it’s not entirely baseless.
We know for example that the nude Aphrodite of Knidos by Praxiteles caused enough of a stir to become a tourist destination, and even she had a conveniently positioned hand covering her goods. Kore statues always had clothes on too, unlike their male counterparts.
I could maybe buy the possibility that almost all of the nude women sculptures were stolen and later destroyed, either intentionally or accidentally, but that doesn’t quite work either. To not find any older nude sculptures in modern times, plus the odd detail that none of the nude ones we do have (copies, admittedly, and I don’t know all the statues either) have anything other than Barbie-smooth instead of even a delicate line suggesting labia… seems odd for an art culture that progressively got more caught up with hyper realism.
They did get nuder and more realistic with time, but we’ve got nothing from the archaic period without at least a skirt on, usually more.
eh, check out these pictures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khajuraho_Group_of_Monuments
india had them.
Sure, but they had an entirely different belief system, and those examples are up to a millennium later. Even the more voluptuous Graeco-Indian female statues from Gandhara got intricate drapery.
Also they’re depicted with small pps because that body part was associated with savagery iirc. If we had the same trend today they would probably all have underwear with a huge bulge because that’s where puritanism and male beauty standards are currently.
Also one of the most significant statues of that era is a female figure…
The penis thing is pretty hotly debated, but savagery comes pretty close to my understanding of the theory you mention. It’s not a hugely different concept from some of the manosphere stuff you find today though.
Basically the idea was (it’s theorized) that thinking with your dick leads to making hasty and bad decisions, but you want to be like the cool smart intellectual philosopher rhetorician dudes ruling society who are strong enough to control their urges. You want to be the civilized powerful master strategist, not the uncivilized weak-willed destructive glutton. So… because art needs to be about reality and be educational (there’s no place for that creative abstract shit), we’re going to de-emphasize the body part associated with urges that are difficult to control. These are powerful rational dudes afterall.
The biggest difference with modern manosphere bullshit is maybe the part where they shrunk the pps on the ripped marble dudes to make that point. Instead we get… social media statue and peacock “science” analogies.
Didn’t the Vatican whack them all off with hammers?
Phrasing. But yes, some of them - they seemed to prefer making plaster and metal fig leaves thankfully. Michelangelo wasn’t thrilled about being told to change his work either. Some of them were whacked off earlier than the Catholics, and some were whacked off by the Vatican even as late as the 1850s in “The Great Castration”.
Many of the lost appendages were accidental though, natural disasters and the like did a lot of amputation and decapitation, to the point where there are entire catalogue methods for mismatched heads on statues.
I’m just thinking of the goonies. Oh no, the statue! Her favorite part!
If we had? We have sculptors. We have people making sculptures. You don’t have to guess what they would make… but yeah, it’s bulges…
Don’t forget nemesis:
I think Nemesis is Roman, but probably a copy of a Greek statue. I might have chosen to forget because the “restoration” work on her head breaks my heart - but I know that’s a common problem. Such a pity because the drapery is gorgeous.
Looking at this Diana/Artemis, who was much luckier than most statues by having her original head reattached, you can see how different it is. The proportions make much more sense.
Image text description below image:
Photo of a marble statue of Artemis (aka Diana), which lives at the Louvre. Artemis is mid-step reaching for an arrow in the quiver on her back. In her other hand she’s pulling on the antlers of a small deer that she has caught. She’s wearing a short and practical belted tunic (chiton) appropriate for hunting, functional sandals, and an equally pragmatic hairstyle with her wavy locks in an up-do. Her arms and legs are neither skinny nor super muscly, they’re very average looking. But, being a goddess, she’s got a tiara. Not an ostentatious tiara, a simple solid tiara. A utility tiara, if you will. And being a female goddess, you can still see her nips pushing on the intricate drapery of her chiton. She’s clearly got some sex appeal carved in, but the statue is of a capable person who is independently getting shit done.
I love her because she basically looks like the kind of woman a modern conservative commentator would condemn for subverting gender roles. Also with a proportional head.
Diane de Versailles - Louvre catalogue
deleted by creator
Right they were “lost over time”. You’ve got a bunch of ripped naked Greek guy statues in your basement don’t you
I wish I had both any cool ancient things and any basement to put them in. I think the oldest thing I own is maybe 100 years at best.
I think I’d be terrified to own anything much older too, conservation is hard.
the hardest part of conservation is learning how to do it. like, i play saxophone and the instruments literally die and need expensive if you go too long without playing. how to take care of a sax? make sure your mouth is clean (like, rinse it out with water at least) before you play. ABSOLUTELY do not eat anything or drink anything other than water (not even flavored water bullshit) while playing unless you want to go brush your teeth before picking your sax up again. don’t leave your spit swab in while it’s in the case even though it fits so perfect in there, and play it regularly (like at least once a week but once a day is better) to make sure the cork doesn’t literally die. so sax conservation boils down to playing often and keeping your mouth clean.
guess how i ruined my first sax dudes. it was not doing this shit above.