Essay 2b
Completeness and Truth
Source Link Judgement of Hunefer Before Osiris
Question: How is it possible that what the Egyptians
considered “completeness”, could be misinterpreted as crude, naïve, or
unrealistic and how does it affect the “truth” contained in their art?
Part One:
Summary: While answering the question, I was able to get a
better understanding on the connection between the Egyptians’ beliefs, more specifically
the afterlife, and their art. By focusing more on their religion, I was able to
organize my thoughts and find the answer to my questions.
Reason: The reason this question was asked is so that we can
explore the Ancient Egyptian culture more in-depth and gain a better
understanding of their art.
Purpose: The purpose this question was asked is so that we
can understand the reason for which the Egyptians created their art the way
they did. In doing so, we may come to realize that we consider being crude and naïve
was the truth to them.
Direction: The first
thing that popped into my mind was the correlation between the paintings in the
pyramids and the afterlife. I have always enjoyed Egyptian art and architecture,
and knew some things about the Egyptians’ belief in the afterlife. I hoped that
by understanding more of their beliefs I could also find out about their art. I
wanted to know the purpose for which they drew human figures in such an awkward
and unrealistic pose.
Impressions: Even though I had a small understanding of the
Egyptians, I was surprised by some of the things I came across. I was surprised
by how much math played a role in their art and architecture. They used
mathematics not only for building but also for their renderings, using specific
ratios.
Part Two:
The
Egyptians were a very religious people. They believed that the universe – “the movements
of heavenly bodies, the working of gods, and the humblest of human activity [–
was a] part of a balanced and harmonious grand design” (Art History, 4th
Edition, M. Stokstad/M.W. Cothren, p.50). Above all, they believed in order. Those
who lived in such a way to disrupt that order were to be punished in the
afterlife, and those who lived righteously could live on eternally.
Most of
the Egyptian art was tied in to their beliefs of the afterlife. They
believed that the ka, or life force, lived
on after the death of the body and could participate in activities it enjoyed
when the person was alive (Art History, 4th Edition, M. Stokstad/M.W.
Cothren, p.53). The ka needed a home
and a body to live in. “It was especially important to provide a comfortable
home for the ka of a departed king,
so that even in the afterlife he would continue to ensure the well-being of
Egypt” (Art History, 4th Edition, M. Stokstad/M.W. Cothren, p.53). The
living quarters for the ka were
decorated with paintings and reliefs, which depicted parts of the deceased’s
everyday life or ceremonial events that proclaimed the deceased’s importance
(Art History, 4th Edition, M. Stokstad/M.W. Cothren, p.61).
The
paintings that decorate the walls of the tombs in Egypt have provided a wealth
of information of Egyptian history. “It was the artists’ task to preserve
everything as clearly and permanently as possible” (http://www.aldokkan.com/art/painting.htm). However, when we look at the figures painted, they are depicted in poses that
would be impossible in real life: the heads are shown at a profile, the eyes
are rendered frontally, the torso is fully frontal, the hips and legs are at a
profile, and the figure is striding to reveal both legs. Not only that, but the
figures were also rigid and flat; there was no attempt at illusionary
three-dimensionality. This is due to the fact that the artist drew from
memory images in such a way that the each body part was represented from its
most characteristic angle (Art History, Portable 3rd Edition, M.
Stokstad, p. 54).
The Egyptians wanted a sense of
order and balance within their art, and, to achieve this, they followed
already-established conventions, such as mathematical formulas to determine
proportions and simplified drawings and contours. The artists even “established
an ideal of the human form, following a canon of proportions. The ratios
between a figure’s height and all of its component parts were clearly
prescribed” (Art History, Portable 3rd Edition, M. Stokstad, p. 54).
What we deem to be crude, naïve or unrealistic – that is to say, the impossible
pose and flat figures – the Egyptians called completeness. The fact that the
images were drawn unrealistically does not take away from the truth of their
art. What is truth but a perception! What we consider to be the truth is
affected by our beliefs. Everything that they did had order, balance, and
harmony that was deeply connected to their beliefs, and THAT was their truth.
