The Link between Art and Culture in the Lascaux Cave Paintings
I believe that the early humans who painted the Lascaux cave paintings were attempting to record the aspects of their life, while also expressing their respect and reverence towards the things they painted.
I am of the belief that the majority of the paintings featured animals over humans simply because the humans who painted them were more focused on their respect of the animals rather than their focus on self. This isn't to say those who paint paintings of humans are vain and self absorbed, just that their focus is on the respect and recording of the individual(s) in said painting.
I believe that these paintings give the viewer a window into the life and behaviors of those who painted them. These paintings showcase great hunts, many different animals (deer, stags, horses, oxen, and felines) and assorted creatures, one prominent being a bird headed human-like figure.
I believe the paintings first and foremost show the deep respect that the artists had for the animals they painted. In short, I am of the opinion that the artists painted these animals as a way for them to "live on" and to record their memory for future generations to see. Furthermore, I also believe that these paintings were utilized to tell the story of past hunts and other animal sightings for future generations. In short, the paintings were a means for the cave painters to "leave their mark" on the world, so to speak.
For one, the materials to create these paintings had to be acquired/created. The many vibrant reds, yellows, blacks, browns and violets featured in the pigments used in these paintings were applied to the stone without brushes, thus increasing the time it took to actually create the paintings. An additional challenge faced by the creators of the paintings was finding a suitable location. They needed to find a location that would properly protect their work, preserving it from the elements for future generations to experience, while also being accessible to them.
I am of the belief that the paintings allowed for the self expression of the artists. These paintings, much like many forms of art today, allowed the painters to express who they were as a people and how their surroundings affected/influenced them. Additionally, as stated previously, I believe these paintings served as a way for the painters to connect with their subject matter (the animals they painted) and express the deep respect and thanks they held for their subject. I also believe these paintings were used to share stories amongst themselves, passing on their culture from generation to generation through their art.
I believe the Lascaux cave paintings share many aspects with modern day art, most notably the ability to provide self expression and to "tell a story" so to speak. These paintings also share the artists want to "leave their mark on the world" for future generations to experience, allowing the artist to spread their experiences and their life through their medium. Art, in its modern form, can and may be argued as a more "advanced" or developed form of these cave paintings but I'd argue the point that this makes it any less "important" or meaningful. In fact, I would argue that these cave paintings are that much more important because it shows an aspect of human nature that has been present since our times in tribes - the need to be remembered and to share our experiences with the world.
I believe the Lascaux cave paintings share many aspects with modern day art, most notably the ability to provide self expression and to "tell a story" so to speak. These paintings also share the artists want to "leave their mark on the world" for future generations to experience, allowing the artist to spread their experiences and their life through their medium. Art, in its modern form, can and may be argued as a more "advanced" or developed form of these cave paintings but I'd argue the point that this makes it any less "important" or meaningful. In fact, I would argue that these cave paintings are that much more important because it shows an aspect of human nature that has been present since our times in tribes - the need to be remembered and to share our experiences with the world.
- https://www.joelmeyerowitz.com/ -
Photographers are constantly trying to capture moments of time in a single photograph. They insert themselves quietly into the moment, take aim, and then immortalize that single fraction of a second of time it takes to capture their image. I believe the main core goal of a photographer is to express the importance of a single moment, and to emphasize the beauty that can be found in every moment of life.
I would argue the culture of photography is more a lack of culture. While there are obviously guidelines that should be followed in reference to respecting others, I believe photography to be such a wide and diverse art form that anyone can practice it. It is in this "lack of culture" that I find the culture of photography to be so interesting and one of reasons I believe it to be such an unique form of art.
I believe photography benefits society in a multitude of ways. I do believe it to have one core benefit to society however, and that is the ease of recording moments. Photography allows anyone to take a second of time, and lay claim to that second and say, "This is my moment. I viewed it through my eyes, and I have captured it and immortalized it for others to see".
I also believe, however, that this strength is also photography's greatest flaw. I believe if one becomes too attached to trying to preserve the moment, they can lose sight of it and thus lose the experience of it. I believe the greatest form of living is to have one approach every moment in life with an equal want to remember and preserve it, while also remembering to live in the said moment and experience it.
If you're interested in looking at any of my work, it can be found here: https://www.instagram.com/j.lin_photography/
Section 1: The first question asks about what *message* these early humans were trying to communicate with their art. Recording and showing reverence are actions but doesn't explain *what* they were trying to communicate... unless they were trying to communicate reverence?
ReplyDeleteLet's be very careful about "reverence" as it is a difficult factor to support with evidence, and we need to be able to do that in science. Do we need to add the level of complexity involved in reverence/spirituality to explain this artifact? Or can we explain it using more simple motivations, like survival of what was likely an extended kin group? I know that the original researchers claimed a religious function, but later researchers opposed that jump in logic, which said more about the biases of the researchers than the intent of the paintings.
So back to that original prompt: What message were these people likely trying to communicate, recognizing that intended recipient of this message may well have been themselves? How does it help to record aspects of their lives?
"the humans who painted them were more focused on their respect of the animals "
Again, these early humans were probably more concerned with ensuring the survival of their population. I don't have a problem with the allegation that "respect" was the motivating factor here, but you need to explain the evidence you have for this.
Consider this instead: We see in these images that when humans are depicted, they are rudimentary stick figures, while animals are depicted in detail and wonderful color. Instead of "respect" or "reverence", can we just suggest that this indicates *importance* to this population? Knowing what these animals looked like was important to them. They knew what humans looked like. No need to put much energy (and paint and time) into drawing them.
I'm going to also caution you on your repeated used of the words "I believe". Use the paintings and the information provided for background to go beyond "belief". What can we deduce and understand from this information.
I agree with your points in the third section, but don't we also gain insight into this culture based upon what is *missing* in these paintings? This really only tells us about creatures seen when hunting, correct? There are no berries, no mushrooms, no birds, no fish and no eggs, things that would be part of the "gathering" process. So who is painting this pictures, men or women? Does that tell us anything about the gender roles of this culture?
Good on the difficulties (a little out of order) but what about the ability to get to these locations? And what about light to paint by?
I agree with the story-telling function. These paintings can be useful passing on information from one generation to the next and to train young hunters.
"Connecting" with the animals they hunt and "self-expression" are luxuries we experience in our own art. I would have to be convinced that these early hunters would be driven to climb deep into dangerous dark caves, drag lighting and equipment in, and risk their lives to create something for self-expression or "connection" with the animals. The biologist in me argues that they would need more concrete benefits, such as:
a. Story-telling
b. Teaching young hunters animals and strategies
c. Record-keeping of hunting data for future hunts
d. Recording important events
My comment was too long and Google wouldn't publish it all. I'll continue it here:
Delete_____________________________________________________
Section 2: Okay, but consider an alternative function that perhaps could serve a rather more concrete function... that of recording information or history for others, either currently or in the future. Art is often used to record events of import, to communicate important information or memories or even to teach. It can also be used in place of a written language, to pass on information instead of just using the spoken word. You approach this idea with the reference to "story-telling" but remember that story telling isn't just for enjoyment or entertainment... it for teaching and communicating important information to others.
Section 3: Thank you for raising photography as an art form. I would argue that photography has carried a heavy influence on our society since it was created. Think about it... before photography, we relied on paintings and drawings, both of which was subject to the bias of the artist... they controlled what they drew. With photography, it is difficult to create bias. The picture is what it is.
Thank you for introducing us to Joel's work. I love his black and whites.
Good coverage of all the prompts here except possibly the last one. You tend to focus on the photographer him/herself when discussing benefits and detriments. The power in photography is in how it is used and interpreted by other who view the images. Photographs are powerful tools that can be used to instruct and inform. They can inspire shock and horror or empathy and joy. They can be used to drive people to action and demand change. Thinking of the images during the Civil Rights era. It was photographs that, at least in part, helped MLK Jr. gain such a following, inspiring many to support him and the Civil Rights era. Unfortunately, it also inspired anger and hatred against him which may have led to his death. Benefits and detriments.