close

Interesting article on art in the stone age by Mike Pitts. I know it starts with the MD word, but the rest of the article discusses art.......


http://artreview.com/features/feature_early_british_art/


"Celtic, Rock, Megalithic and Ice: it’s a strange litany. Is that all? Well, no. As long as people have made things, they have conformed to styles, showing a feeling for what looked right in their particular world. And when you define what’s ‘right’, you allow for expertise in hand and eye – if people can say a stone axe blade should look just so, they know when one is fine or beautiful, or poorly made or misshapen."

Very interesting. That reminds me very much of the Ice Age exhibition and lecture I went to at the British Museum, particularly the massive and wafer thin spearhead which you may recall too Moss? The curator was talking about symmetry in the lecture, it's something that our brains find pleasing isn't it. Your article says " they were more symmetrical, more finished and made with more expertise than was needed for the job." (Could it not be though, that it IS needed for the job to some extent? It's not much good having a totally wonky arrowhead or axe, is it really going to be as good at the job?) And if you're not in a terrible hurry, and you've got the skills, you'll want to produce something decent looking for your own satisfaction I'd have thought. Form and function but with a bit of human psychology and instinctive appreciation of well crafted, well balanced, easy on the eye object too? Also then you get some status, and the object gets some status. And as with that big spearhead, it becomes more of a symbolic object, not something that you'd use, because you've actually made it too flimsy to use. It's become a beautiful object in itself, a piece of art I suppose.