How Do We Look - Mary Beard

Introduction

History of art = question of how we look
- Returning the viewers of art, not just the artist, into the frame
What is civilization?
- Deceptively difficult to define— often in terms of us vs them; a process of exclusion as well as inclusion
- Idea of barbarity often used as a weapon, but “one person’s barbarity is another person’s civilization.”

Focuses on art of the body, earliest depictions of men and women— what were they for and how were they seen?

In Greek pottery, Images of people on functional objects like water jugs akin to modern advertisements, suggesting ideal ways of living, how to be a stereotypically good Athenian
Other figures depicting mythical creatures like satyrs → bring up boundary btw civilization and its absence, human vs animal

Greek statues commemorating the dead
Roman portraiture → some of first naturalistic depictions of faces, esp used in rituals of death, on coffins
- Central halls of rich Roman houses = gallery to images of dead ancestors

What were these for, if not meant to be seen?
Each soldier is unique, but faces composed from finite sets of features— each one is not really a portrait of anyone, but rather likenesses

Egyptian pharaohs constructing massive images of themselves— Rameses II
Images on external faces of the structures could be seen by anyone; like modern viewers, likely with some ridiculous or skepticism of actual extent of the ruler’s power
Internal images only accessible to priests, inner circle— aimed at elite to remind them who’s boss, and to the pharaoh himself to reinforce sense of power

Winckelmann → history of art parallels history of politics (and thus civilization); peak of both = Greco-Roman
- Legacy → provides standard for western viewers to judge art id other cultures by; often distorting, divisive lens

Focuses on images of God abs gods, how all religions across time have struggled to depict the divine
When does worship of worship of image turn into idolatry? What counts as an image of God, or God’s word? Where fires glorification of God end and worldly vanity begin? What does it mean to look religiously?

Interpretation in original context— dimly lit, complex compositions— key to meaning
Require active role of viewer to do religious work, find and follow characters and story of the Buddha
- Enacting metaphor of searching for truth, faith amid darkness

Asserts Christian message and power, combined with that of Byzantine emperor (ex. Justinian)
Time of controversy over the nature of divine essence of Jesus vs God → San Vitale mosaics make strong case for Jesus’s divine status
Christian art (ex. that of Tintoretto) → implications on role of charitable aims in religion— depict biblical scenes with poverty, putting viewer in the position of a beggar
- Brings up question of idolatry— the more you glorify God through images, the more you are interested in the worldly and material over the spiritual and piety
- How much is focus on statues of, say, Mary, on the idea of her rather than the image itself?

Not an artless religion— home to intricate debates in aesthetics, the nature of beauty…
- Question of how boundary of what art is acceptable can shift based on setting and context
- Borderline between art and written word, with prevalence of calligraphy: when words cover surfaces of the mosque, not meant to be read, but perhaps to represent God through his art of writing, as his word, or as a blessing
Modern-day Sancaklar Mosque → very untraditional in some ways (no dome or color, built into hillside); very traditional in others (only one man-made image, combination with natural form)

Iconoclasm → destruction of religious imagery; of course this leads to tragic loss, but also makes the art into a visual narrative of religious conflict, balance between destruction and creation
Islamic reaction to Hindu temples = more nuanced than simply destroying them
- Also had fascination with Hindu art, reusing elements in their own structures