30 Millennia of Erotic Art E-Book

Hans-Jürgen Döpp

• Herausgeber: Parkstone International
• Kategorie: Erotik
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016

Seitenzahl: 402

Beschreibung

From the thousand-year-old statues celebrating fertility, to the odalisques of the modern painters, erotic art has always held a prominent place in societies, whatever their morals or cultural references. This work assembles one thousand images of erotic art, from all times and all continents, to illustrate how the representation of these pleasures of the flesh testifies to the evolution of different civilisations and their histories. While eroticism abounds today in advertising and in the media, this book offers an exceptional view into the archives of erotic imagery and emphasises the artistic value of these magnificent illustrations of sin.

Leseprobe

30 Millennia of

Authors: Hans-Jürgen Döpp (Introduction), Joe A. Thomas, Victoria Charles and Klaus H. Carl

© Confidential Concepts, worldwide, USA

© Parkstone Press International, New York, USA

Image-Barwww.image-bar.com

© Hans Arp Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn

© Francis Bacon Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ DACS, London

© Balthasar Balthus Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Paul-Emile Bécat

© Hans Bellmer Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Max Beckmann Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn

© Emile Bernard Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Louis Berthommé Saint-André Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Biederer Studio for Ostra Editions

© Camille Bombois, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Pierre Bonnard Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Fernando Botero

Art © Louise Bourgeois/ Licensed by VAGA-DACS, New York, NY

© Constantin Brancusi Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Joe Brockerhoff

© Romaine Brooks

© Maurizio Cattelan

© Helen Chadwick Estate

© Marc Chagall Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Camille Claudel Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Salvador Dalí, Gala-Salvador Dalí Foundation/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR

© John De Andrea

© Paul Delvaux Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ SABAM, Brussels

© Jean Delville Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ SABAM, Brussels

© Maurice Denis Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© André Derain Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Otto Dix Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn

© Jean Dubuffet Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Marcel Duchamp Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris/ Succession Marcel Duchamp

© Raoul Dufy Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Xawery Dunikowski

© Jacob Epstein

© Max Ernst Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Leonor Fini Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Lucian Freud

© Vincenzo Galdi

© Alberto Giacometti Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Duncan Grant, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Red Grooms, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

Art © George Grosz/ Licensed by VAGA-DACS, New York, NY

© Richard Hamilton Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ DACS, London

© The Estate of Keith Haring

© Erich Heckel Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn

© Jean Hélion Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Bowness, Hepworth Estate

© 2012 David Hockney

© Heirs of Josephine N. Hopper, licensed by the Whitney Museum of American Art, *, **

© Alain Jacquet Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Allen Jones

© Banco de México Diego Rivera & Frida Kahlo Museums Trust. AV. Cinco de Mayo n°2, Col. Centro, Del. Cuauhtémoc 06059, México, D.F.

© Yves Klein Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Oskar Kokoschka Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ Pro Litteris, Zurich

© Pyotr Konchalovsky Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Elisar von Kupffer

© Marie Laurencin Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Henri Laurens Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Fernand Léger Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Courtesy Estate of Roy Lichtenstein, New York

© Tamara de Lempicka Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Richard Lindner Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© C. Herscovici, Brussels/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR

© Aristide Maillol Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Estate Man Ray/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation. All rights reserved.

© André Masson Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Henri Matisse, Les Héritiers Matisse, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Succession H. Matisse, Paris/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR

© Ilya Mashkov

© Successió Miró, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Pierre Molinier Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Edvard Munch Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ BONO, Oslo

© Emil Nolde Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn

© The Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR

© Max Pechstein Estate/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn

© Dominique Peyronnet

© Peter Phillips

© Francis Picabia Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Estate of Pablo Picasso/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR

© Pierre et Gilles. Galerie Jérôme de Noirmont, Paris

© Sigmar Polke

© The Pollock-Krasner Foundation/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR

Art © Mel Ramos/Licensed by VAGA-DACS, New York, NY

© Martial Raysse Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Red Grooms

© Ker Xavier Roussel, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Karl Schmidt-Rottluff Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn

© Ulo Sooster

© Antoni Tàpies Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ VEGAP, Madrid

© Vladimir Tatlin Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

Tom of Finland 1986 © Tom of Finland Foundation

www.TomofFinlandFoundation.org

© Elena A.Volkova

© Kees Van Dongen Estate, Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR/ ADAGP, Paris

© Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts/ Irish Visual Artists Rights Organisation (IVARO), Dublin, IR

Art © Estate of Tom Wesselmann / Licensed by VAGA-DACS, New York, NY

All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or adapted without the permission of the copyright holder, throughout the world. Unless otherwise specified, copyright on the works reproduced lies with the respective photographers, artists, heirs or estates. Despite intensive research, it has not always been possible to establish copyright ownership. Where this is the case, we would appreciate notification.

ISBN: 978-1-78310-333-1

Contents

Introduction

Prehistory and Antiquity

The Middle Ages

The Renaissance

Baroque

The Modern Age

Introduction

Erotic art or pornography?

“That which is pornography to one person is the laughter of genius for the other.”

— D. H. Lawrence

The term “Erotic Art” is muddied by a miasma of ambiguous terms. Art and pornography, sexuality and sensuality, obscenity and morality, are all involved to such an extent that it seems almost impossible to reach an objective definition, which is not unusual in the history of art. How does one define erotic art?

This much is certain: the depiction of a sexual act alone is not enough to qualify it as erotic art. To identify erotic art just by its content would reduce it to one dimension, just as it is impossible to distinguish art from pornography simply by describing what it depicts. The view that erotic works are created solely for sexual arousal, and so cannot be art, is also erroneous. Does the creative imagination brought to erotic art distinguish it from pornography? Yet pornography is also a product of the imagination – it has to be more than just a depiction of sexual behaviour, or who would buy it? Günter Schmidt states that pornography is “constructed like sexual fantasy and daydreams, just as unreal, megalomaniacal, magical, illogical, and just as stereotypical.” Erotic daydreams are also the subject of erotic art. Those making a choice between art and pornography may have already decided against the former. Pornography is a moralising, defamatory term. What art is to one person is the Devil’s handiwork to another. The mixing of aesthetic with ethical-moralistic questions dooms every clarification process from the start.

In the original Greek, pornography means “prostitute writings” – that is, text with sexual content – in which case it would be possible to approach pornography in a free-thinking manner and equate the content of erotic art with that of pornography. A re-evaluation of this term would amount to its rehabilitation.

The extent to which the distinction between art and pornography depends on contemporary attitudes is illustrated, for example, by the painting-over of Michelangelo’s Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel. Nudity was not considered obscene during the Renaissance. The patron of the work, Pope Clement VII, saw nothing immoral in its execution. His successor, Paul IV, however, ordered an artist to provide the figures in the Last Judgment with pants!

Another example of the difficult relationship between society and erotic art is the handling of the excavated frescos of Pompeii, which, until recently, were inaccessible to the public. In 1819, the Gallery of Obscenities was established in the Palazzo degli Studi, a locked room in the future National Museum, to which only people of mature age and high moral standards had access. The collection changed its name to the Gallery of Locked Objects in 1823. Again, only those with a royal permit were able to view the exhibited works. The reactionary wave that followed the unrest of the “Italian” Revolution in 1848 also affected the erotic collection of the museum. In 1849 the doors of the Gallery of Locked Objects were closed forever; three years later the collection was transferred to an even further removed section of the museum in which the doors leading to the area were bricked up.

It was not until 1860, when Guiseppe Garibaldi marched into Naples, that the reopening of the erotic collection was even considered; its name was changed to the Pornographic Collection. Over time, many objects amongst it were removed and returned to the normal exhibition rooms. The history of the gallery thus provides an overview of the morals of the last three centuries. Not every age is equally propitious for the creation of erotic art and its associated aspects. It can even become its confessed enemy. The libertine environment of the Rococo period, on the other hand, created a very favourable atmosphere for eroticism and erotic art. However, erotic art is not only a reflection of sexual freedom; it can also be a by-product of the suppression and repression with which eroticism is burdened. It is even conceivable that the most passionate erotic works were created not in spite of, but rather because of the cultural pressures placed on sexuality. In nature, the instinct-controlled sexuality of animals is not based on eroticism, but the culture of eroticism uses and depends on nature. Whereas sexuality as an imperative of nature – even in humans – is timeless, eroticism is changeable: as a form of sexuality that is culturally conditioned, it has a history.

Eroticism thus has to be understood as a socially and culturally driven phenomenon. In this case, it is the subject of moral, legal, and magical prohibitions, which are put in place to prevent sexuality from harming the social structure. The bridled urge expresses itself, but it also encourages fantasy without exposing society to the destructive dangers of excess. This distance distinguishes eroticism from sexuality. Eroticism is a successful balancing act that finds a precarious equilibrium between the cold flow of a rationally organised society – which in its extremes can also lead to the collapse of a community – and the warm flow of a licentious and possibly destructive sexuality.

Yet, even in its tamed form, eroticism remains a demonic power in human consciousness, echoing the dangerous song of the sirens, in that approaching them is fatal. Devotion and surrender, regression and aggression: these are powers that still tempt us. The convergence of desire and longing for death has always played a big part in literature.

Insofar as eroticism consists of distance and detours, the fetishist constitutes the picture-perfect eroticist. The fetishised object, in its fixed, tense relationship with what is immediate, is more significant to the fetishist than the promise of fulfilled desires represented by the object. The imagined body is more meaningful than any real body.

Collectors are eroticists as well. While the lecher or debauché is active in real life, the collector lives chastely in a realm of fantasy. Moreover, the chaste heart can relish the delights of vice even more deeply and thoroughly than the debauched.

Not only does art allow a distancing of object and viewer, but it affords freedom, the freedom to play with fire without being burned. It appeals to the eye, and allows toying with sin without committing a sinful act. This freedom through distance can be noted when observing the different reactions of viewers when looking at sex magazines and works of art: have you ever seen the viewer of a porn magazine smile? A quiet cheerfulness, however, can frequently be observed in viewers of works of art, as if art is capable of reducing the sensual impact of a piece. However, those who in a derogatory manner pronounce a work of art to be pornographic prove only their lack of artistic appreciation in the object depicted. Turning away in disgust does not necessarily characterise morality. Such people may simply be unsusceptible to erotic culture. Eduard Fuchs, the past master of erotic art, whose books were accused of being pornographic during his lifetime, considered eroticism the fundamental subject of all art: sensuality is said to be present in any art, even if its objective is not always sexual. Hence, it would almost be a tautology to speak of “erotic art”.

Long before Fuchs, Lou Andreas-Salomé had already pointed out the true relationship between eroticism and aesthetics: “It seems to be a sibling growth from the same root that artistic drive and sexual drive yield such extensive analogies that aesthetic delight changes into erotic delight so imperceptibly, erotic desire so instinctively reaches for the aesthetic, the ornamental (possibly giving the animal kingdom its ornament directly as a bodily creation).” In the evening of his life, Picasso was asked about the difference between art and eroticism; his pensive answer was: “But – there is no difference.” Instead, as others remarked about eroticism, Picasso warned about the experience of art: “Art is never chaste; one should keep it away from all innocent ignoramuses. People insufficiently prepared for art should never be allowed close to art. Yes, art is dangerous. If it is chaste, it is not art.”

Viewed with the eyes of a moral watchdog, every type of art and literature would have to be abolished. If spirit and mind are the essence of humanity, then all those placing the mind and spirit in a position opposed to sensuality are hypocrites. On the contrary, sexuality experiences its true human form only after developing into eroticism and art – some translate eroticism as the art of love. Matters excluded from the civilising process assert themselves by demanding a medium that is spiritually determined, and that is art. It is in art that sexuality reaches its fullest bloom, which seems to negate all that is sensual in the shape of erotic art.

Pornography is a judgmental term used by those who remain closed to eroticism, and whose sensuality perhaps never had the opportunity to be cultivated. These culturally underprivileged people – among them possibly so-called art experts and prosecuting attorneys – perceive sexuality as a threat even when it occurs in an aesthetically-tempered format. Even the observation that a work has offended or violated the viewpoints of many does not make it pornographic. Art is dangerous! Works of art can offend and injure the feelings of others, and do not always make viewers happy. After all, is it not the duty of art to provoke a reaction and shake things up? The term pornography is no longer in-keeping with the times. Artistic depictions of sexual activities, whether they annoy or please, are part of erotic art. If not, they are insipid, dumb works.

Eastern societies, in particular, have known how to integrate the sexual and erotic into their art and culture. Chinese religion, for example, which is entirely free of Western notions of sin, considers lust and love as pure. The union of man and woman under the sign of Tao expresses the same harmony as the alternation of day and night, winter and summer. One can say – and rightly so – that the ancient forms of Chinese thought have their origins in sexual conceptions. Yin and yang, two complementary ideas, determine the universe. In this way, the erotic philosophy of the ancient Chinese also encompasses a cosmology. Sexuality is an integrated component of a philosophy of life and cannot be separated from it. One of the oldest and most stimulating civilisations on earth thus assures us through its religion that sex is good, and instructs us, for religious reasons, to carry out the act of love creatively and passionately. This lack of inhibition in sexual matters is mirrored in Chinese art.

Similarly, the great japanese masters created a wealth of erotic pictures, which rank equal with the nation’s other works of art. No measure of state censorship was ever able to completely suppress the production of these images. Shungas (Images of Spring) depict the pleasures and entertainment of an earthly world. It was considered natural to seek out the pleasures of the flesh, whatever form they took. The word “vice” was unspoken in ancient Japan, and sodomy was a sexual pleasure like any other.

In India, eroticism is sanctified in Hindu temples. In Ancient Greece, it culminated in the cult of beauty, joining the pleasures of the body with those of the mind. Greek philosophy understood the world as an interplay between Apollo and Dionysus, between reason and ecstasy.

Only Christianity began to view eroticism in the context of sin and darkness, so creating irreconcilable differences. “The Devil Eros has become more interesting to man than all the angels and all the saints,” maintained Nietzsche, a tenet that would probably find no sympathy in Japan – Eros was never demonised there. In fact, what Nietzsche lamented in the West never occurred in Japan, nor in many other Eastern cultures. “Christianity”, in Nietzschean words, “forced Eros to drink poison”.

In Western Europe, erotic depictions were banished to secret galleries. The floating, transitory world was held in chains, and only with great difficulty was science able to free sexuality from prejudices and the association with sin. It is therefore no wonder that sexology developed wherever the relationship between sexuality and eroticism was especially ambivalent or troubled. Our cornucopia of a colourful, erotic world of images and objects shows that Eros can be an all-encompassing and unifying energy. These items provide an opportunity to steal a glimpse of an essential, human sphere – usually taboo – through the eyes of artists with a continuously changing point of view.

Unlike pornography, which often lacks imagination, erotic art allows us to partake in creative joy. Even if some of the pictures seem strange to us, or force us to confront taboos, we should still open ourselves to that experience. Real art has always caused offence. Only through a willingness to be affronted can this journey through the geography of pleasure be profitable, in the sense that it enriches our innermost selves. The humour evident in many works of erotic art is only accessible to those who can feel positive about claiming the erotic experience.

This book invites you to take a special journey, one that will open up a vista of pleasures and desires. An abundance of images and objects from art, as well as from religion, presents eroticism and sexuality as the universal, fundamental subject. By opening ourselves to its origins in a variety of cultures, some of them strange, we may enrich our own as well. The many and varied points of view encountered in these works demonstrate the multifarious aspects of sexuality, and reveal that nothing is more natural than sexual desire; yet paradoxically, nothing is less natural than the forms in which this desire expresses itself or finds satisfaction.

Items long hidden in the vaults of public museums and galleries of private collectors can be seen in this book. Many of these pictures and objects were forbidden in a Western society that was less open to sexuality and anything associated with it. Hence they grant us a rare and, therefore, fascinating glimpse of what is part and parcel of human nature. Pictures of the pleasures of the flesh contained here promise a feast for the eyes, albeit a distanced pleasure. Yet, is not the essence of eroticism that it should be just beyond reach?

The cultural history of humankind can extend the limits of tolerance by helping to expand the viewer’s opinion. It can also liberate minds from the clichés that may occupy our fantasies and imagination. Reading this book will hopefully achieve both these ends.

— Hans-Jürgen Döpp

1. Anonymous, Venus, c. 29,000-25,000 BCE.

Palaeolithic. Dolní Vistonics, (Czech Republic). Burnt clay, 11.1 x 4.3 cm. Private collection.

Prehistory and Antiquity

Among the earliest evidence of the existence of mankind are small Palaeolithic sculptures of women, such as theVenus of Laussel(fig. 6). As a symbol of fertility, the subject of Venus favoured stylised interpretations. However, we know almost nothing about the conditions of creation and use of these sculptures. Similar figures were found at a later date in the Minoan civilisation. The Minoans practised a religion that is also evidenced in statues, such as that of the serpent goddess (fig. 9). Though the proportions are more naturalistic, her feminine attributes are nonetheless underlined. However, its function and true identity, as a goddess or priestess, are still uncertain.

Greek civilisation laid the essential foundations of the modern world. The ancient Greeks developed a cult of the body, especially the male body, and admiration for its athletic prowess is reflected in many idealistic depictions of young male nudes. During the Archaic period, the Kouroi (fig. 16, 18) decorated the graves of young warriors. The Doryphoros (fig. 36), from the hands of Polyclitus, shows the evolution of these figures into a purely aesthetic expression, based on a set of ideal proportions rather than on those of a live model. Decorated ceramics were the principal painted art form of this period, and provide an inexhaustible source of information and numerous erotic subjects. The Greeks practised a form of institutionalised homosexuality in which a grown man became “mentor” of a young boy. However, this patriarchal society had little room for the sexual expression of women; widows were often sequestered and girls were sheltered. In erotic scenes, women were usually either prostitutes or deities. Aphrodite, the goddess of love, was given the most erotic treatment, as in the statue produced in the 4th century BCE by Praxiteles (fig. 47). The beauty of the figure was such that it became a tourist attraction in Attica and, according to Pliny, a man tried to make love to it.

The Hellenistic phase of Greek art was characterised by drama and emotion. The Barberini Faun (fig. 61) is a representation of a sensual spirit. Part goat, the figure expresses animal sexuality and allegiance to Dionysus, which is reflected in its apparent intoxication. The Venus de Milo (fig. 70) is the most famous and graceful of all depictions of Aphrodite. In Italy, the Etruscan civilisation adapted many Greek ideas, but accorded higher social status to women. Etruscan sarcophagi often displayed couples (fig. 21), and sometime painted decorations which depicted sexual activity. The Romans also followed and imitated Greek culture. Mansions rediscovered in the 18th century in the buried cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum reveal the rich sexual, and often humorous culture of the Romans. Brothels used erotic scenes to advertise or decorate their interiors. Gay themes were also not uncommon, such as the Warren Cup (The British Museum, London) which shows two male couples engaged in an erotic game, while sculptures glorifying Antinous, the young lover of Emperor Hadrian, abounded under the Empire (fig. 98). Although belonging to a greater tradition of realism, the treatment of the body in Roman art owed much to Greek heritage, and for centuries to come both Greek and Roman models represented an ideal for art and culture.

2. Anonymous, Rhombic Body of a Woman, c. 26,000-18,000 BCE.

Palaeolithic. Green steatite. Private collection.

3. Anonymous, The Venus of Lespugue, c. 26,000-24,000 BCE.

Palaeolithic. Curtains Cave, Lespugue (France). Mammoth ivory, 14.7 x 6 x 3.6 cm. Musée de l’Homme, Paris.

4. Anonymous, Venus Monpazier, c. 23,000-20,000 BCE.

Palaeolithic. Height: 5.5 cm. National Archaeological Museum, Saint-Germain-en-Laye.

5. Anonymous, The Venus of Willendorf, c. 30,000-25,000 BCE

Paleolithic. Limestone with red polychromy, height: 11.1 cm. Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna.

Discovered in 1908 in the town of Krems, Lower Austria, the Venus of Willendorf is a limestone statuette dating to the Gravettian era. It represents a nude standing woman with steatopygous forms. The head and face, finely engraved, are completely covered and hidden by what appears to be coiled braids. Traces of pigment suggest that the original sculpture was painted in red. In fact, this statuette is the most famous example and one of the oldest sculptures of the Palaeolithic prehistory named by modern pre-historians “Venus”. Indeed, the corpulence of her body (breasts, buttocks, abdomen and thighs) can easily be equated to the symbols of fertility, the original feature of femininity, of which Venus has, since antiquity, been the pure incarnation. However, the interpretation of these works remain enigmatic and cannot really be verified. Some say statuettes of Venus were part of a religious cult, for others they were the “guardians of the home” or, more simply, the expression of an “ideal of Palaeolithic beauty”.

6. Anonymous, Venus of Laussel, c. 20,000-18,000 BCE

Paleolithic. Limestone, 54 x 36 x 15.5 cm. Musée d’Aquitaine, Bordeaux.

7. Anonymous, Mating, c. 5,000-3,000 BCE.

Neolithic. Aouanrehet (Algeria). In situ.

8. Anonymous, Reclining Female Figure, c. 2,400-2,300 BCE.

Paleolithic. Naxos (?) (Greece). White marble, 36.8 x 11.3 x 3.2 cm. The Menil Collection, Houston.

9. Anonymous, Statuette of a Snake Goddess, c. 1,600-1,500 BCE.

Gold and ivory, height: 16.1 cm. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

10. Anonymous, Statuette of Nefertiti (side view and front view), c. 1,570-1,320 BCE.

Ancient Egyptian (18th dynasty). Tell el-Amarna (Egypt). Limestone, height: 40 cm. Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin.

11. Anonymous, Woman’s Body (perhaps Nefertiti), c. 1,345-1,337 BCE.

Ancient Egyptian (18th dynasty, reign of Amenhotep IV, or Akhenaten). Silicified sandstone, height: 29 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

12. Anonymous, Akhenaten with the Queen or a Princess, c. 1,570-1,320 BCE.

Ancient Egyptian, (18th dynasty). Limestone, height: 39.5 cm. Egyptian Museum, Cairo.

13. Anonymous, Relief of Humbaba, first half of 2nd millennium BCE.

Ancient Near East, Mesopotamia. Moulded terracotta. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

14. Anonymous, Prehistoric Version of the Kiss, c. 1,000 BCE.

Bronze Age. Vitlycke Rock Carvings near Tanum (Sweden). In situ.

15. Anonymous, The Cosmic Union of Geb and Nut (detail from an Egyptian papyrus), c. 1,025 BCE.

Ancient Egyptian. Vignette, 53 x 93 cm. The British Museum, London.

16. Anonymous, The Sounion Kouros, c. 600 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 305 cm. National Archaeological Museum of Athens, Athens.

17. Anonymous, Kleobis and Biton, c. 610-580 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Apollo Sanctuary, Delphi (Greece). Marble, height: 218 cm. Archaeological Museum of Delphi, Delphi.

Kleobis and Biton are life-size statues that were found in the sanctuary at Delphi. An inscription identifies the artist as coming from Argos, on the Peloponnesus. The sculptures’ origin in Argos links them to the mythical twins Kleobis and Biton. These young men from Argos were said to pull a cart a full five miles in order to bring their mother to a festival dedicated to the goddess Hera. In return, Hera granted the men what was seen as a great gift: a gentle death while sleeping. The brothers fell asleep after the festival and never woke up. Their great strength, devotion to their mother, and their early deaths were memorialised in dedicatory statues offered at the great sanctuary at Delphi, according to the historian Herodotus. These statues, which may be those described by Herodotus, are close in date to the Dipylon Head and share the same Egyptian style and decorative, incised details.

18. Anonymous, Kouros, known as Apollo from Tenea, c. 560-550 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 153 cm. Glyptothek, Munich.

19. Anonymous, Kouros of Kroisos,c.530 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Anavyssos, Attica. Marble, height: 194 cm. National Archaeological Museum of Athens, Athens.

20. Anonymous, The Kritios Boy, c. 480-470 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 116 cm. Acropolis Museum, Athens.

21. Anonymous, Sarcophagus of a Couple fromCerveteri, c. 520-510 BCE.

Ancient Etruscan. Painted terracotta, 111 x 194 x 69 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

Though their civilisation flourished alongside that of the Greeks, our limited understanding of Etruscan language and culture has left a veil of mystery over the people who lived in Italy before the Roman Republic. Their art was strongly influenced by that of the Greeks, as evidenced by this terracotta sarcophagus with its echoes of the style of the Greek Archaic period. In Etruscan sculpture, however, we find more lively subjects, like this couple, animated in their easy affection for each other. Like so much of Etruscan art, this is a funerary piece, designed for placement in one of the elaborate tombs the Etruscans carved out of the soft volcanic bedrock of central Italy. It reveals the Etruscan view of the afterlife: an eternal party, where men and women would lounge at a banquet, enjoying good food, drink, and the company of their loved ones.

22. Anonymous, Dying Warrior, c. 500-480 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Temple of Aphaia, Aegina. Marble, height: 185 cm. Glyptothek, Munich.

Greek temples often featured large sculptures decorating the pediment, the triangular space under the eave of the roof. The first examples of pedimental sculpture show that the early artists were not adept at filling the awkward triangular space with a cohesive composition; the figures in the corners were shrunk to a diminutive scale in comparison to the central figures. However, in this pediment group from the end of the Archaic period, the sculptors showed new skill in conceiving the composition. The central figures, not shown, engage in lively battle, lunging and parrying with swords and shields. One archer crouches to take aim, his low position allowing him to fit into the smaller space toward the corner of the pediment. The Dying Warrior next to him fills that corner, the angle of his falling body perfectly fitting into the smallest part of the pediment. A single, cohesive narrative is thereby created across the triangular space, telling the story of a battle fought by local heroes.

23. Anonymous, Marble low-relief. Ancient Etruscan.

The Tomb of the Bulls, Tarquinia (Italy).

24. Euaichme Painter, Man Offering a Gift to a Youth, c. 530-430 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Athenian goblet with red figures. Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

25. Anonymous, Man and Ephebe Having a Conversation, c. 420 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Dish with red figures (detail). Musée Municipal, Laon.

26. Euphronios, Ephebes at the Bath, Ancient Greek. c. 505-500 BCE.

Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Berlin.

27. Triptolemus Painter, Attican goblet (detail).

Ancient Greek. Museo Nazionale Tarquiniese, Tarquinia (Italy).

28. Anonymous, Scene of Debauchery, 510-500 BCE.

Goblet with red figures (detail). Ancient Greek. Private collection.

29. Brygos Painter, Erastes Soliciting an Eromenos. Attican goblet (detail).

Ancient Greek. The Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

30. Anonymous, Satyr, 470 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Bronze. Private collection, Athens.

31. Anonymous, after Myron, Discobolus, c. 450 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 148 cm. Museo Nazionale Romano, Rome.

In Myron’s Discobolus, we see the human form freed from the standing, frontal pose of earlier statues. Here, the artist is clearly interested not only in the body of the athlete, but in the movement of the discus thrower. His muscles tense and strain in preparation for his throw, his face focused on his activity. While the pose, with the arms forming a wide arc, is revolutionary, the piece is still meant to be viewed from the front. It would not be until the following century that artists began to conceive of sculpture that could be viewed from all sides.

MYRON

(ACTIVE DURING THE FIRST HALF OF THE 5THCENTURY BCE)

Myron, a mid-5thcentury BCE Greek sculptor,worked almost exclusively in bronze. Though he made some statues of gods and heroes, his fame rested primarily upon his representations of athletes, for which he proved revolutionary by introducing greater boldness of pose and a more ideal rhythm. His most famous works, according to Pliny, were a cow, Ladas the runner, who fell dead at the moment of victory, and a discus-thrower,Discobolus(fig. 31). The cow seems to have earned its fame largely by serving as a peg on which to hang epigrams, which tells us nothing of the animal’s pose. Of the Ladas, there is no known copy; we are fortunate, however, in possessing several copies of theDiscobolus. The athlete is represented at the moment he has swung back the discus with the full stretch of his arm, ready to hurl it with all the weight of his body. His face is calm and untroubled, but every muscle in his body is focused in effort.

Another marble figure, almost certainly a copy of a work of Myron’s, is a Marsyas eager to pick up the flutes Athena had thrown away. The full group is copied on coins of Athens, on a vase and in a relief representing Marsyas as oscillating between curiosity and fear of Athena’s displeasure. His face of the Marsyas is almost a mask; but from the attitude we gain a vivid impression of the passions affecting him.

The ancient critics say of Myron that, while he succeeded admirably in givinglife and motion to his figures, he failed in rendering the mind’s emotions. To a certain degree this is evidenced here; the bodies of his men are of far greater excellence than the heads.

He was a somewhat older contemporary of Phidias and Polykleitos.

32. Anonymous, The Battle between the Lapiths and the Centaurs, c. 470-456 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Temple of Zeus, Olympia. Marble, height: 330 cm. Archaeological Museum, Olympia.

33. Anonymous, Heracles Receiving the Golden Apples of the Hesperides from the Hand of Atlas while Minerva Rests a Cushion on his Head, c. 470-456 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Temple of Zeus, Olympia. Marble, height: 160 cm. Archaeological Museum, Olympia.

This metope, or square component of the frieze of the temple, is from the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, the largest and most important structure of the first half of the 5thcentury. Together, the metopes of the Temple of Zeus told the story of the twelve labours of Heracles. Each metope showed one of his labours, or tasks. This metope shows the eleventh labour, the apples of the Hesperides. Heracles was told he had to steal apples belonging to Zeus. He met with Atlas, who had to hold up the world for all of time. Atlas said he would get the apples for Heracles if Heracles would hold the earth for him. In the scene shown, Atlas has returned with the apples, and Heracles must figure out how to get Atlas to take back the weight of the world. Athena stands behind Heracles, gently helping him hold his burden.

34. Anonymous, Leda and the Swan, copy after a Greek original created by Timotheus, first half of 5th century BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 132 cm. Musei Capitolini, Rome.

35. Anonymous, The Tyrannicides Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Roman copy after a Greek original created by Critios, c. 477 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 195 cm. Museo Archeologico Nazionale, Naples.

Metal was a valuable commodity in the ancient world, so sculptures made of bronze or other metals were often eventually melted down by a conquering nation or a successive ruler who did not care for the art of his predecessor. For that reason, few large-scale bronze sculptures survive from the Classical era. Romans, however, had a taste for Greek art, and copied many of their bronze sculptures in stone, the material preferred by Romans. Often, the bronze original has since been lost, and the Roman copies are all that survive. Such is the case with this group, Roman copies in marble of two Greek sculptures in bronze. The subjects are Harmodius and Aristogeiton, lovers who together conspired to murder the political tyrant, Hippias. They lost their nerve and killed his brother instead, but were revered as heroes by Athenians who believed them to have murdered the tyrant. Statues of the two were erected in their honour in the Athenian Agora.

36. Anonymous, Doryphoros, Roman copy after a Greek original created by Polykleitos, c. 440 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 196 cm. The Minneapolis Institute of Arts, Minneapolis.

The Doryphoros is one of the most famous sculptures of ancient Greece, embodying the ambition of Polyclitus to illustrate, in a single work, the ideal proportions of the human body. Yet the work we admire today is only a copy of the original bronze created by a contemporary of Phidias. The work owes its name to the fact that the young man kept in his left hand a spear (now missing); “Doryphoros” in Greek meaning “spear carrier”. Defining the canons of male beauty, it evokes both the Hellenic ideal of the athlete and the soldier. Traditionally, Polyclitus is recognised as being the first sculptor to use the contrapposto in his works, with the pelvis being twisted to one side. This method is used to give more flexibility to traditional, hieratic sculptures and presents a man standing with most of his weight on one foot while the other one is resting, slightly bent end extended back, so that his shoulders and arms twist off-axis from the hips and legs. This posture, which gives the impression of a contrast between movement and rest, crossed the centuries and influenced many works, as witnessed by the David of Michelangelo (fig. 167).

37. Anonymous, Diadoumenos, the Young Athlete, copy after a bronze original created by Polykleitos, c. 430 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 186 cm. National Archaeological Museum of Athens, Athens.

Polykleitos is one of the best-known sculptors of the 5thcentury BCE, renowned for his athletic dedications. The figure ties back his hair in preparation for sport. His clothes rest next to him on a low branch, as Greek athletes exercised in the nude. Polykleitos’ Doryphoros, or Canon, sought to illustrate the ideal male figure. In this piece, we see the same proportions the sculptor established with his Canon and the same attention to anatomical realism. The Polykleitan ideal is a heavily muscled, somewhat stocky body, especially compared to the more gracile figures of the next century.

POLYKLEITOS

(ACTIVE DURING THE 5THCENTURY BCE)

Polykleitos was a contemporary of Phidias, and, in Greek opinion, his equal; he made a superior Amazon figure (fig. 46) for Ephesus. His colossalHeraof gold and ivory, which stood in the temple near Argos but has since disappeared, was considered worthy of Phidias’Zeus. Working mainly in bronze, his artistic activity must have been long and prolific.

The balance, rhythm, and minute perfection of bodily form make it difficult for a modern critic to rate the merits of this sculptor so high, as they appeal less to us than they did to the 5thcentury Greeks. We find a certain heaviness in his female characters that makes it difficult to distinguish them from males.

Copies of his spearman (Doryphoros) and victor (Diadoumenos,figs.36,37) have long been recognised in galleries. While we understand their excellence, they inspire no enthusiasm; they are fleshier than modern athletic figures and lack charm. Ancient critics reproached Polykleitos for his lack of variety, though his talent remained unsurpassed.

38. Anonymous, Apollo, known as Apollo Parnopios, copy after a Greek original created by Phidias, c. 450 BCE.

Marble, height: 197 cm. Staatliche Museen, Kassel.

Apollo was the god of music, poetry, medicine, archery, and prophecy; and was always shown as young and beautiful. Here, he has the idealised body of a young male athlete. The naturalism of his anatomy, with his sculpted muscles and graceful movement, is expressed through the relaxed, contrapposto stance. His expression is thoughtful but emotionless. This statue is transformed into Apollo by the addition of the elaborately curled long hair, and his attributes, the bow and laurel wreath, which he would have held in each hand.

39. Anonymous, Riace Bronze B, Roman copy after a Greek original created by Phidias, c. 450 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Bronze, height: 197 cm. Museo Nazionale, Reggio Calabria.

A sunken treasure, this bronze statue was pulled from the sea, having been lost in a shipwreck during the Classical period. Ironically, its loss in the sea resulted in it being one of the few bronze statues to survive from the era, since it was never melted down for its valuable metal. The warrior is one of a pair that has been attributed to the 5thcentury BCE, or High Classical Period. In this piece we can see the ideals of High Classical period sculpture fully realised. At the same time realistic and idealistic, the sculpture shows a lifelike, but perfect, body, each muscle articulated, the figure frozen in a relaxed, life-like pose. The solid, athletic body reflects the ideal of a young athlete, although this figure represents an older warrior, who once would have held a spear and a shield. The nudity of the figure also alludes to the athlete, who in Greece would have practised or competed in the nude, and also to the mythical hero, a reminder that the man represented here was no ordinary warrior, but a semi-divine hero, an appropriate offering for one of the great sanctuaries of the Greek world.

PHIDIAS

(ATHENS, C. 488 BCE – C. 431 BCE)

Son of Charmides, universally regarded as the greatest of Greek sculptors, Phidias was born in Athens. We have varying accounts of his training. Hegias of Athens, Ageladas of Argos, and the Thasian painter Polygnotus, have all been regarded as his teachers.

The earliest of his great works were dedications in memory of Marathon, from the spoils of the victory. On the Acropolis of Athens he erected a colossal bronze image of Athena, visible far out at sea. Other works at Delphi, at Pellene in Achaea, and at Plataea were appreciated; among the Greeks themselves, however, the two works of Phidias which far outstripped all others – providing the basis of his fame – were the colossal figures in gold and ivory of Zeus at Olympia and of Athena Parthenos at Athens, both of which date to about the middle of the 5thcentury.

Plutarch gives in his life of Perikles a charming account of the vast artistic activity that went on at Athens while that statesman was in power. For the decoration of his own city he used the money furnished by the Athenian allies for defence against Persia. “In all these works,” says Plutarch, “Phidias was the adviser and overseer of Perikles.” Phidias introduced his own portrait and that of Perikles on the shield of his Parthenos statue. And it was through Phidias that the political enemies of Perikles struck at him.

It is important to observe that in resting the fame of Phidias upon the sculptures of the Parthenon we proceed with little evidence. What he was celebrated for in Antiquity was his statues in bronze or gold and ivory. If Plutarch tells us that he superintended the great works of Perikles on the Acropolis, this phrase is very vague.

Of his death we have two discrepant accounts. According to Plutarch he was made an object of attack by the political enemies of Perikles, and died in prison at Athens. According to Philochorus, he fled to Elis, where he made the great statue of Zeus for the Eleans, and was afterwards put to death by them. For several reasons the first of these tales is preferable.

Ancient critics take a high view of the merits of Phidias. What they especially praise is the ethos or permanent moral level of his works as compared with those of the later “pathetic” school. Demetrius calls his statues sublime and at the same time precise.

40. Anonymous, Diomedes, Roman copy after a Greek original, c. 430 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 102 cm. Glyptothek, Munich.

41. Anonymous, Aphrodite (Venus Genitrix), Roman copy after a Greek original created by Callimachus, end of 5th century BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 164 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

CALLIMACHUS

(ACTIVE BETWEEN C. 432 – C. 408 BCE)

An ancient sculptor and engraver, Callimachus was nicknamed “katatxitechnos”– “the perfectionist.” He left behind no writings, but we know his life through the works of Pausanias and Vitruvius, although today certain of their accounts seem doubtful. It is known that he contributed to the decoration of the Erechtheion. For this temple he created, among other things, a magnificent golden lamp, above which was mounted a bronze palm branch, which trapped the smoke. Several beautiful sculptures were also ascribed to him: a group of Lacedemonian dancers and a statue of the seated Hera made for the Heraion of Plataea. What characterises Callimachus more than anything else is his painstaking attention to detail; hence the nickname. Purportedly, he was the first to use a drill for shaping marble. He modelled his work on the tradition of the old masters and pioneered the Archaic style.

Callimachus also has a place in the history of architecture. He is considered the inventor of the Corinthian capital. According to the legend told by Vitruvius, he got the idea while looking at the acanthus blossom wrapped around a basket which had been placed on a child’s tomb.

42. Anonymous, Male Torso, in the style of the Diadoumenos, copy after a bronze original created by Polykleitos, c. 430 BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 85 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

43. Anonymous, Hermes Tying his Sandal, Roman copy after a Greek original created by Lysippos, 4th century BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 161 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

LYSIPPOS

(C. 395 – C. 305 BCE)

The Greek sculptor, Lysippos, was head of the school of Argos and Sicyon in the time of Philip and Alexander of Macedon. His works, some colossal, are said to have numbered 1500. Certain accounts have him continuing the school of Polykleitos; others represent him as self-taught. He was especially innovative regarding the proportions of the human male body; in contrast to his predecessors, he reduced the head size and made the body harder and more slender, producing the impression of greater height. He also took great pains with hair and other details. Pliny and other writers mention many of his statues. Among the gods he seems to have produced new and striking types of Zeus, the Sun-god and others; many of these were colossal figures in bronze. Among heroes he was particularly attracted by the mighty physique of Heracles. TheHeracles Farneseof Naples, though signed by Glycon of Athens, and a later and exaggerated transcript, owes something, including the motive of rest after labour, to Lysippos. Lysippos made many statues of Alexander the Great, and so satisfied his patron, no doubt by idealising him, that he became the king’s court sculptor; the king and his generals provided numerous commissions. Portraits of Alexander vary greatly, and it is impossible to determine which among them go back to Lysippos.

As head of the great athletic school of Peloponnese, Lysippos naturally sculptured many athletes; a figure by him of a man scraping himself with a strigil was a great favourite of the Romans in the time of Tiberius; it has usually been regarded as the original copied in theApoxyomenosof the Vatican (fig 55).

44. Anonymous, Apollo Sauroktonos, Hellenistic copy after a Greek original created by Praxiteles, 4th century BCE.

Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 149 cm. Museo Pio Clementino, Vatican.

45. Anonymous, Venus and Cupid, Roman copy after a Greek original, 4th century BCE.

Restored at the end of the 17th century CE by Alessandro Algardi. Ancient Greek. Marble, height: 174 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

Aphrodite became a common subject for Greek sculptors in the 4thcentury BCE and later, because her renowned beauty provided an acceptable excuse for an erotic representation of the female body. She is sometimes shown, as here, with her son Eros, known to the Romans as Cupid, and in later art as “putti,” the winged babies symbolising earthly and divine love. In Roman art and mythology, Aphrodite became Venus, goddess of love. To the Romans she had a more elevated status, seen as the progenitor of the line of Caesar, Augustus, and the Julio-Claudian emperors, and by extension, as an embodiment of the Roman people. This playful depiction of Aphrodite and Eros, or Venus and Cupid, is more suggestive of the Greek view of Aphrodite, who saw her not only as the symbol of sensual beauty, but also as occasionally silly and humorous.

46. Anonymous, Wounded Amazon