Prehistoric Art
&
"Venus of Willendorf"
The term "Venus" refers to the many images of Venus through the ages, modest, sensual and sexual. The perfect woman, created to evoke erotic feelings in the male population. This however, would not explain why such a strangely overweight and immodest female representation of it would be entitled the same name. Unless of course it was done sarcastically, then of course that would make more sense.
We may not know much about the artist that created "Venus of Willendorf", or even who they were, male or female... But this little piece of stone, carved so masterfully between 21 and 24,000 B.C. still has quite a story to tell. Why talk about it? Well for one art speaks to us. That's what makes us human. We can identify and relate to it, or wonder for countless hours how it was made, what happened during its lifetime, why it was made, who made it, or even when it was made. But because it was made, we have reason to analyze it, and the artist behind it.
As a contemporary artist, this sculpture at first slightly shocked me. Not only because it was a blatantly female nude statue from prehistoric times; But because of the body type of the statue. It's so lifelike it demands attention to all the perfect details. However, looking at the possible time period it was created in, it just doesnt make sense that a woman could afford to be that overweight and still survive. The seemingly large form of this statue is so perfectly done, that if seen on her own in a photograph, for example, you would not be able to tell that she could fit in the palm of your hand. Like the article said (http://witcombe.sbc.edu/willendorf/ ) this must have meant that the woman this statue was made in likeness was important enough for other people to take care of her completely; and be created in likeness that's portable enough to go wherever the nomadic people needed to go. Which is evident in the type of rock, and where it was discovered. (Far away from where rock like that comes from) Also just as surprising, it seems as if it was originally supposed to look like it was on its menstrual cycle, so that would lead to assume that it was a female that created it. This piece of possible information inspires me.
All in all, aside from the obvious overweight nature of the woman, and the lack of a face, I see this image as beautiful. Not only because of the fine job that the artist did in rendering it so carefully; but because of its simple unashamed nature. The embodiment of a woman, that most people would find repulsive, is simple enough in its existence that seems to me as if she could exist in any era as a work of art. The only reason that most people wouldn't consider this piece to be beautiful in this time period is because it doesn't fit into the harsh standards and strict boundaries that most people associate with the perfect woman in this era. Not only is she not run-model thin, but she doesn't try to hide the fact that she is nude. Because I live in this generation, at first I was a bit put off at the statue, and had a slightly hard time finding it to be beautiful; but my conclusion stands, The "Venus of Willendorf" is in fact beautiful and worthy of the attention that she gets.
Hi Kelsee. As the article points out, when the "Venus" nickname was first used with these prehistoric female figurines, there was quite a bit of sarcasm and irony involved. The article mentions how Vibraye (who came up with the "immodest Venus" reference) wanted to draw a comparison between a prehistoric figurine (who doesn't attempt to cover her body) and the "modest" Venus statues that existed in the classical period. I think it's unfair to view these prehistoric statues on basis of comparison with the Greeks (or anything else for that matter). I think prehistoric art should be appreciated on its own terms, not simply on a comparative basis.
ReplyDeleteIf you're interested in seeing the "armless, headless" figurine that Vibraye first nicknamed "Venus" (as a tongue-in-cheek comment), you can see it here.
-Prof. Bowen
I personally don't see the figure as 'beautiful' at all - something about the texture of the stone bothers me I think - but I must agree that the sculpting in and of itself is pretty amazing. I wish I could have seen her when she was first carved, maybe then I could appreciate it as much as you do.
ReplyDeleteAs a total side note, you have a lovely writing style, very nice and easy to read.
I agree with you that the figurine is beautiful. I have to remind myself that this was done 24-22,000 BCE, and things were obviously much much different back then compared to today. A full figured woman back then must have been one of high standings and served upon. Back then I’m sure almost all women would have loved to look like this woman due to the fact that they were constantly on the move, looking and hoping to get enough food. So in order to have as much weight as this woman, life I would assume would have been leisurely and plentiful. I also think it is interesting that the Venus of Willendorf is so voluptuous. If she wasn’t, it seems that she would be grouped in with all of the other Venuses over the ages and therefore make her simply a number. Instead she represents beauty of her own time period, and compared to the ideals of today she raises conversation and discussion, just like this assignment and for that reason I appreciate this figure that much more.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the figure could hold some "beauty" but I definitely think it takes some digging and uncovering with your own thoughts till you can reach that point. First impression of the figure tends to put people off as obese and repulsive. However, I think once you get the facts and some of the speculations, it is easier to come to a conclusion at that point. I strongly agree that our generation makes us view this statue as something that is not up to today's standards of aesthetic taste.
ReplyDeleteI like that you noted "It's so lifelike it demands attention" I agree, she does seem very lifelike even without a face or feet. `The idea that she was created so long ago really captivates me. This statue being on it's menstrual cycle definitively makes me think it was created by a woman. It also seems like an odd attribute, why would the creator incorporate that?
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that this piece hold a sort of beauty because of the bold statement she makes. Its almost as if she is standing proud and uninhibited. I sort of find it a shame that most people will probably look at this statuette and feel some sort of repulse for her shape. However, she is real, there are people who really look this way. Does this mean that because of our modern views on how a female is supposed to look, a woman of similar form to the Venus does that mean they are any less beautiful than the "model woman"?
ReplyDeleteIt wouldnt let me put my name so this is Jennifer groce.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with the fact that when I first saw it too I was shock because of its body type. I personally do not find the figurine repulsive or beautiful she is in the middle, she is normal. Even if I don't think she is beautiful I do agree with you that she is worthy of the attention she gets.