| |
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Re: Fort and Daniken 89 messages | Select a forum: |
Resonox wrote: Still the portrayal of animals/prey is quite detailed...it is the humans/hunters which is, shall we say, of a less mature imagery...so why the distinction I wonder?....Despite all our collective ideas and theories it'll all come back to.."we'll never know"! It seems clear that if the artist (child or adult) could produce detailed renditions of animals then they could also have produced similarly detailed renditions of people. But of course, they didn't (leastways not in the majority of the art that has survived). This tells us quite a lot. It tells us that the detailed reproduction of the animals was culturally important in some way. While the reproduction of the people was less so. The best theory (in my humble opinion) that explains this is the totem-theory. That is, the artist felt that by accurately portraying the animal and then piercing the painted animal with spears or arrows, they were increasing the likelihood of a successful hunt. The person doing the piercing is almost an afterthought, as the focus of the painting was the animal to be hunted. We have some - albeit tenuous - evidence for this in the painting of the Balinese tribes who were visited in the early part of the 20th century and who felt that by first producing a painting of a particular religious ceremony they would increase the chances of the ceremony being a success. Of course we must eventually throw our hands in the air and admit we'll never truly know. But on the other hand, we shouldn't be too afraid of placing a degree of faith in our theories. After all, the time between then and now doesn't diminish the fact that we are human and so are they. And we're probably far more alike than some would care to admit. Technology has certainly changed us, but deep down...? Deep down I suspect we're more similar than we are different. Reply | with quote | Posted by John Rice 6th June 2012ce 13:47 In reply to: Re: Fort and Daniken (Resonox)3 replies: Re: Fort and Daniken (Sanctuary) Re: Fort and Daniken (Littlestone) Re: Fort and Daniken (Resonox) |
Messages in this topic: |
|