Discussion Responses

Respond to Discussion posts with 100 words each 

Read and respond to discussion with 100 words.

CULPTURE:  How did Roman sculpture differ from that of the Greeks? Give specific examples.

Greek and Roman art were both original and distinguished by features which can be compared but had significant stylistic differences.  Early Roman art was greatly influenced by the art of Greece via trade.  After reading about both the Roman and Greek sculptures. I see the Greeks statuary was created to represent and idealized Athletes and Gods. While the Romans idealized ordinary people and their natural beauty and imperfections.   The Greeks represented the Gods in their art to express the ideal form of beauty, physical strength, and power.

The Romans, however, art had a more practical function and brought a more naturalistic and ostentatious style with highly decorative statues often created out of bronze and marble. They were inspired to create and honor their ancestors, gods and goddesses, philosophers, military generals, and leaders.  Romans way of life was a mixture of many cultures they adopted over time..

 The Greeks art was carved idealizing and displaying eternal- youthful figures showing the perfection of the human form. Greek art held in high regards by the expanding Romans who set out to conquer the Mediterranean and coming home with art and treasure from across the land.

The Greek architecture was trabeated, post and beam. The Romans had an effective form of concrete and used arcuated forms, arches and domes and barrel vaults. Romans became a vast unified empire there was more cause for monumental construction both commemorative, religious, and decorative. The Greeks did all of this too but divided into warring city-states. The Romans made much more use of the arch, and because columns were not as necessary for support, they used faux columns as decoration rather than structural.

In conclusion the difference between the Greeks and the Roman art is revealed in the comparison of the cultures.     

Source:

“Rome: Rise and Fall of the Empire.” The Humanistic Tradition: Prehistory to the Early Modern World, by Gloria K. Fiero, McGraw Hill Education, 2015, pp. 160                                                                                                                                                                                               

One of the first human aspects of Achilles that we see in the interchange between Achilles and Priam is Achilles crying. Both men cried as they were reminded of their losses. Then we see that Achilles’ “longing for tears had left his body.” Not only do we see him show human vulnerability by crying, but he also demonstrates pity for Priam and even acknowledges how much Priam had been through up to that point. He says to Priam, “Poor man, how much you’ve borne.” Then we see him forget about the man’s son which he has held in his camp, the man in front of him who was just mourning his son had to remind Achilles that he was holding his son and that he did not want to leave without him. This could demonstrate a sense of prideful arrogance on Achilles’ part. This pridefulness is further seen when Priam offers him the ransom he has brought for his son. Achilles gives Priam a “dark glance” and seems a little insulted by the previous statement offered by Priam, almost threatening Priam. When Achilles finally does decide to bring Hector, Priam’s son, out to Priam, he is worried. He is worried that once Priam sees Hector he will be refilled with the sense of wrath and anger against Achilles for the past, so Achilles reverts back to his strategic soldier self and decides to give Hector back in a way that Priam will not see his face until the first light of day.

From this interaction we see Achilles go through several emotions and reactions that have human attributes. He starts off the story crying, then to being so sad that his body had no tears left to shed. He feels sympathy and pity for Priam, but later reverts to wrath and worry. Achilles’ personality is one of someone who does not want to lose. He is a strategic soldier, but at the same time that does not excuse him from displaying feelings of sympathy and grief. The book describes his hands as “those terrible, man-killing hands.” He was definitely a soldier first, and when Priam showed a sign of softness towards Achilles, even Achilles was shocked by the moment. He may have had moments of human vulnerability, but he was first and foremost a prideful soldier.

Fiero, Gloria K. The Humanistic Tradition. 7th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2015.