The first work that I have chosen to examine is Battle of the Bird and The Serpent, Commentary on the Apocalypse by Beatus and Commentary on Daniel by Jerome, on page 434. The bird in the image is a very stylized painting. Around the majority of the bird there is a very heavy outline that makes its body very flat and cartoon like, especially around the face. Its eye also has this thick outline, and the eye it self is much larger, and less detailed, than a natural bird's eye. The peacock's feathers are also made up of various geometric shapes, such as: the circles on its neck; the rectangles on its body and chest; and the longer and larger rectangles and circles on its wing.
Its legs on the other hand don't seem to fit with the rest of its body. They seem a lot more naturalistic, though there are a few rectangles that make up the scales on the legs. The talons though seem very life like and I think that it so add emphasis to the painting in order to connect it more with the story that it was illustrated for. The story (or allegory) that goes a long with this is the triumph of Christ over Satan. The snake (Satan) tried to attack the peacock (Christ), but the peacock managed to trick the snake into thinking it was harmless and caught it in it's mouth and killed it.
For the most part the bird seems relatively harmless with the way it was stylized to have a very general and simple appearance. You can really only tell that the bird is a peacock because of its extravagant tail feathers, and even these have been generalized into another simpler pattern to just give us the impression that it is a peacock (rather than it actually being a natural looking peacock).
The snake in the image is a lot more naturalistic in comparison to a real snake. The only stylization that I see is in the face and at the end of the snakes body. The face has a very large and un-snake-like eye on it that's very flat with a rounded pupil. There is also a somewhat natural pattern running down the snakes body for its scales, however this pattern is cut off at one point for another less detailed pattern near the end of the snakes body.
There is also a tree (plant?) next to the animals that is very generalized to just give us the impression that it is a plant. The tree has a very thin trunk and branches, each with either 1 leaf or flower on them. As far as I know there are no natural trees out there that look like this, so I would have to say that overall the tree is very stylized. The size of the animals in the illustration also suggest that this is a more stylized piece, because snake is longer than the tree, and the peacock is almost as tall as the tree. It's not natural, and I do believe it does convey God like forces fighting against one another (like in the allegory).
The second work that I chose to examine is Page with Christ Washing the Feet of His Disciples, Aachen Gospels of Otto 3, on page 451. This piece is incredibly stylized. The more I look at it the more strange things I see in it. Overall the painting is entirely flat, so there is no depth of space, except for in spots when one person or object is placed in front of another person or object.
Every person and object in the painting has a thick line outlining it, like a cartoon. The faces are also very generalized with: small noses; mouths made up of 1 line; and small/simple ears; with very large and simplified eyes. Each face also carries the same facial expression as every other face in the painting. And I've also just realized that, aside from Peter, the old man in the background, and Christ, everyone in the painting has the same hair color and hair style.
The most recent object in the painting that has caught my attention is the tree stump in the lower right hand corner. At its base it starts off fairly normal, but then seems to bend so that its flat top is facing toward the viewer. You also see this bending taking place in feet and with the wash bowls.
The only thing in this painting that has any bit of naturalism in it is the clothing that each person is wearing. The folds and lines of the clothing flow well and act like clothing should act on the human body.
Also does anyone else think that Peter looks like Sean Connery in this?
4 comments:
I'm glad that you mentioned the "cartoon" appearance of Ottonian art. We can see some of the other features that I mentioned in lecture, too: thin arms, elongated limbs, and even a potbelly or two.
I hope Sean Connery would be pleased to know that some people think he looks like a figure in this Ottonian book!
-Prof. Bowen
After reading your post, I found a picture of the Battle of the Bird and The Serpent. As you said, overall is a very stylized version of a peacock, snake and tree. I also found it unusual how the peacock is very stylized expect it's feet which are about the most naturalistic part of the the image. It makes one wonder way the artist choose to create the feet far more natural looking rather then just continuing the stylization
I find it oddly interesting that God as a peacock was trying to appear harmless, when those talons are so obviously dangerous. you would think that they would be even more stylized than the rest of the image to convey a feeling of harmlessness, but instead its the most natural (and dangerous) looking part of that picture... interesting ideas. lol Sean Connery
Love the comment about Sean Connery!! It's interesting that you chose two pieces that were both stylized, though most of the art from this time is the same. It's an interesting note that the peacock was trying to be harmless. It's even more interesting when the peacock is representing Christ.
Post a Comment