The
rendering of this portrait is basically calculated, static perceptual
naturalism. This is based on the superb, detailed attention on the folds of the
subject’s flesh and clothing, and the attention on the subject’s facial
expression and hair. Aside from the life-like purpose of this work is its political
message. The oversized portrait of the emperor is placid, in control and
differential based on his gesture and dress. It fulfills all of the political
purposes typical of pre-Christian imperial Roman art.
If not for the recognizability of the subjects this work would be impossibly balanced. The artist has expertly captured a mid-motion and marching gallop, the forward motion of which and the anticipation of the unengaged leg stabilizing its sense of mass. The employment of voids in this work is underappreciated.
This is a good example where equivalence in subject size creates tension either because the man is over-enlarged or because the horse is diminished. The argument could made that this disparity is not a distraction and is fully necessary to suit the needs of the patron, which would be more in line with a harmonious relationship.
The emperorship of Marcus Aurelius had a component of self-reflection, but it was also characterized by territorial expansion and internal consolidation. These qualities are all referenced in this portrait. All directional forces are forward, into the future, guided by the moral judgement of the philosopher-emperor. The pose of the horse is not so much a gallop. Actually, at one time, it trampled on an barbarian (now missing), again referencing Marcus Aurelius’ military feats.
This work seems to be meant to be elevated in relation to any observer. The gravity of the emperor’s countenance, the direction of his gaze and even the posture of the steed suggest this. The pose and position of limbs that direct outward from the central figurative mass create a sense that the figures need space to “breathe”, rather than providing a tone of intimacy.
An original Roman creation, this statue survives today because it was mistaken in the succeeding centuries for a statue of the first Christian emperor Constantine. While this statue combination itself might be formally simple, if not a master’s challenge to execute, the amazing accomplishment of the artist is how she or he was able to illustrate a vision of the Roman nation-state and of the character of the emperor for all observers. Elevating content to the the level of subject in a work of stable naturalism is a rare feat.
If not for the recognizability of the subjects this work would be impossibly balanced. The artist has expertly captured a mid-motion and marching gallop, the forward motion of which and the anticipation of the unengaged leg stabilizing its sense of mass. The employment of voids in this work is underappreciated.
This is a good example where equivalence in subject size creates tension either because the man is over-enlarged or because the horse is diminished. The argument could made that this disparity is not a distraction and is fully necessary to suit the needs of the patron, which would be more in line with a harmonious relationship.
The emperorship of Marcus Aurelius had a component of self-reflection, but it was also characterized by territorial expansion and internal consolidation. These qualities are all referenced in this portrait. All directional forces are forward, into the future, guided by the moral judgement of the philosopher-emperor. The pose of the horse is not so much a gallop. Actually, at one time, it trampled on an barbarian (now missing), again referencing Marcus Aurelius’ military feats.
This work seems to be meant to be elevated in relation to any observer. The gravity of the emperor’s countenance, the direction of his gaze and even the posture of the steed suggest this. The pose and position of limbs that direct outward from the central figurative mass create a sense that the figures need space to “breathe”, rather than providing a tone of intimacy.
An original Roman creation, this statue survives today because it was mistaken in the succeeding centuries for a statue of the first Christian emperor Constantine. While this statue combination itself might be formally simple, if not a master’s challenge to execute, the amazing accomplishment of the artist is how she or he was able to illustrate a vision of the Roman nation-state and of the character of the emperor for all observers. Elevating content to the the level of subject in a work of stable naturalism is a rare feat.
No comments:
Post a Comment