In this essay I aim to compare three writers opinions and attitudes towards the unclothed, these writers cosmos Castagnary , Zola and Clark . I testament also discuss whether or not I think their comments offer an adequate response to the bare-ass, plot of land referencing two works from the Salon of 1863- Alexandre Cabanels genus Venus (fig. 1) and Edouard Manets Olympia (fig. 2).
The nude in art has been a consistent theme and field of view for artists throughout the history of art, be it religious art or portraiture, the human form has always fascinated mankind . provided attitudes and opinions about the right and wrong kind of nudes differ hugely, as I will discuss. In the controversial salon of 1863 crowds were dismayed and outraged by Manets Olympia, with her direct gaze and unacceptable standards of modelling and composition, but were delighted with Cabanels Venus (which subsequently was purchased by emperor Napoleon III ), that have all the refined eroticism that was expected of salon goers of the time. Castagnary epitomises this idealised view of the nude in his account of 1863 when he uses the words dazzling, immaculate and naked beauty to describe the nude form of the goddess Venus.
Castagnary also comments on Venuss harmonious pose and pure, well arranged contours.
Cabanels Venus is stark(a)ly, technically drawn- idealised, devoid of any imperfection or body hair. She is sexually passive, characterless and more perfect than is humanly possible- which fitted with the accepted style of the time. According to Frances Borzello, Cabanel adheres to a unrelenting set of conventions when he paints his Venus as historically, the reclining nude is particoloured in the guise of a classical goddess and tends to lie with her eyeball turned from the spectator, half closed, or even closed (as in Cabanels piece), offering no obstacle...
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment