Journals / Art-Sanat Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 7

EVALUATION OF ATTIC VASE PAINTING IN THE CONTEXT OF ART OF PAINTING

ATTİK VAZO RESMİNİN RESİM SANATI BAĞLAMINDA DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Pages
1–17
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Determination of figured pottery from a canvas painter’s point of expertise could illuminate the limitations and real context of attribution studies

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The attribution of vases to particular individual hands based on the signatures of painters or potters on the vases, the connoisseurship, obtained too much importance especially in the case of Athenian black figure and red figure pottery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It is because; through close examination of details of style it becomes possible to establish the interaction between “artists” and a sequential chronology for vases of black figure and red figure techniques.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Determination of figured pottery from a canvas painter’s point of expertise could illuminate the limitations and real context of attribution studies
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The attribution of vases to particular individual hands based on the signatures of painters or potters on the vases, the connoisseurship, obtained too much importance especially in the case of Athenian black figure and red figure pottery. It is because; through close examination of details of style it becomes possible to establish the interaction between “artists” and a sequential chronology for vases of black figure and red figure techniques. But some scholars have raised doubts on the limits of such studies. Reexamination of our perception of artist in connection with the attribution studies for Attic figured pottery and the idea supporting connoisseurship are necessary. Determination of figured pottery from a canvas painter’s point of expertise could illuminate the limitations and real context of attribution studies

Özet

Arkeolojide, Attik siyah figür ve kırmızı figür vazolarının vazolar üzerindeki çömlekçi ya da ressam imzalarından yola çıkarak özellikle belirli bireylere, ressamlara, atfedilmesi çok önem taşıyan çalışmalardır. Bunun nedeni, vazo resimlerinin detaylı incelenmesi ve stil kritiği ile ressamlar arasında ilişkiyi kurmak ve siyah figür ve kırmızı figür vazolar için bir kronoloji oluşturmanın mümkün olmasıdır.Ancak bu alanda çalışan bazı bilim insanlarının, çalışmaların sınırları ile ilgili şüpheleri vardır. Bu bağlamda Attik figürlü vazoları için ressam belirleme (atıf) çalışmalarının, günümüz "sanatçı" algımız bağlantısı ile yeniden değerlendirilmesi gereklidir. Bu değerlendirmenin bir ressamın bakış açısı ve uzmanlığı ile yapılması atıf çalışmalarının gerçek kapsamı ve içeriğini aydınlatılmasına olanak sağlayacaktır

🔖

Cite This Article

MUŞKARA, Ü., ŞAHİN, S. (2022). EVALUATION OF ATTIC VASE PAINTING IN THE CONTEXT OF ART OF PAINTING. Art-Sanat Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 7, 1–17. https://ajindex.com/articles/450312

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Alexandridou, A. 2011. The Early Black-Figured Pottery in Context (c. 630-570 BCE), Leinden: Brill. Beazley, J.D. 1931. “Amasea”, JHS, 51: 256-285.
  2. Beazley, J.D. 1944.
  3. Potter and Painter in Ancient Athens, London: Oxford University Press.
  4. Beazley, J.D. 1986. The Development of Attic Black-Figure, Berkeley: University of California Press.
  5. Boegehold, A.L. 1985. “The Time of the Amasis Painter”, The Amasis Painter and His World: Vase-Painting in Sixth-Century B.C. Athens, ed. D. Bothmer, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 15-32.
  6. Bothmer, D. 1985. “The World of the Amasis Paniter”, The Amasis Painter and His World: Vase-painting in Sixth-Century B.C. Athens, ed. D. Bothmer, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 33-58.
  7. Cohen, B. 1991. “The Literate Potter: A Tradition of Incised Signatures on Attic Vases”, Metropolitan Museum Journal, 26: 49-95.
  8. Fichner-Rathus, L. 2008. Foundations of Art and Design: An Enhanced Media Edition, Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Frel, J. 1994.
  9. Studia Varia, Roma: L'Erma di Bretschneider. Liassarrague, F. 1997. “Le peintre des demi –palmettes: aspects iconographiques”. (Eds), Athenian Potters and Painters, eds. J. Oakley et al., Oxford: Oxbow, 125-139.
  10. Merten, J.R. 1987. “The Amasis Painter: Artist and Tradition”, The Amasis Painter and His World: Vase-Painting in Sixth-Century B.C. Athens, ed. D. Bothmer, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum. 168-183.
  11. Morris, I. 1994. “Archaeologies of Greece”, Classical Greece: Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies, ed. I. Morris, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 8-47
  12. Morris-Kay, Gillian M., 2010. “The Evolution of Human Artistic Creativity”, Journal of Anatomy, 216(2): 158-176.
  13. Neer, R. 2005. “Connoisseurship and the Stakes of Style”, Critical Inquiry, 32: 1-26.
  14. Oakley, J. 1998. “Why study a Greek vase-painter?”, Antiquity, 72: 209-13.
  15. Oakley, J. 2009. “The State of the Discipline, Greek Vase Painting”, AJA, 113: 599-627.
  16. Pevnick, S. 2010. “Loaded Names, Artistic Identity, and Reading an Athenian Vase”, Classical Antiquity, 29: 222-249.
  17. Robertson, M. 1987. “The State of Attic Vase Painting in the Mid-Sixth Century”, Papers on the Amasis Painter and His World, ed. A.P.A. Belloli, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 13- 29. Rouet, P. 2001. Approaches to the Study of Attic Vases: Beazley and Pottier, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  18. Sapirstein, P. 2013. “Painters, Potters, and the Scale of the Attic Vase-Painting Industry”, AJA, 117: 493-510.
  19. Sapirstein, P. 2014. “Demographics and Productivity