Monday, April 30, 2012

ESSAY #3c

 
ESSAY #3c
COMPARE & CONTRAST – All Together Now!
INSTRUCTIONS: Find and post the images of the artwork(s) mentioned in the Topic Essay Question.
QUESTION: Would you describe the building of the Egyptian pyramids and the Cathedral of Our Lady of Chartres as a community or, a public works project? If yes, why and can you find other similarities. Research and select one other example of architecture from another culture, time period or geographic location and compare and contrast it to the other two to and describe why you selected it.

Part One
Summary: I had trouble writing this one mostly because I didn't have much time since I had no idea it was due until the day of.
Reason: The reason this question was created was to get the writer to think about different cultures and the way they lived and compare them.
Purpose: The purpose of this question is to get the writer to think differently about other societies and cultures.
Direction: Answering this question has sparked an interest for me about the way other societies lived.
Impressions: My impressions are that cultures all lived very different lifestyles but in a similar fashion.

Part Two
The Egyptian pyramids and the Cathedral of Our Lady Chartres seem like two very different structures with two very different purposes, but they were both built with the intent of serving the community. I wasn't quite positive of what a public works project entailed so I looked it up online: “works constructed for public use or enjoyment especially when financed and owned by the government” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/public+works). Community is defined as “a unified body of individuals” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/community). It would seem that the Egyptian pyramids and the Chartres Cathedral could easily be defined as such. The third example I chose is the Temple of the Inscriptions.


These were built by three successive Fourth-Dynasty kings: Khufu (r.c. 2551-2528 BCE), Khafre (r. 2520-2494 BCE), and Menkaure (r.c. 2490-2472 BCE) (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 56). The pyramids were built by these kings over such a long period of time, therefore it was an important project in the community. Very elaborate and important ceremonies took place at the pyramids when they entombed their dead- which mainly consisted of kings. They believed once you left this earth you moved on to the afterlife and this was a very important transition for them that they truly believed was sacred and true. “Teams of workers transported them [2.5 ton blocks] by sheer muscle power, employing small logs as rollers or pouring water on mud to create a slippery surface over which they could drag the blocks on sleds” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 57). I already find this extremely hard to believe because based on prior knowledge a very large truck sized vehicle would weigh about one ton, so for them to lift 2.5 times that is amazing, so they must've been very determined. For such work to go into just a tomb for their dead- it must have really meant something to them. It took them almost a century to build the entire complex, so it was very important.


Chartres was the site of a pre-Christian virgin-goddess cult, and later, dedicated to the Virgin Mary, it became one of the oldest and most important Christian shrines in France. Its main treasure was a piece of linen believed to have been worn by the Virgin Mary when she gave birth to Jesus...The healing powers attributed to the cloth made Chartres a major pilgrimage destination...” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 498). Chartres Cathedral was obviously a large part of the community based on its size and its huge importance during that time and still to this day. It is where people in the community congregate to celebrate a belief that they all share together, and this is a unifying feeling, sharing that faith together. “Such a project required vast resources- money, raw materials, and skilled labor. A contemporary painting shows a building site with the masons at work. Carpenters have built scaffolds, platforms, and a lifting machine.” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 500). The way I see it is- how could it not be a public works project? This building is massive, consisting of many different sections. “Thousands of stone[s] had to be cut accurately and put into place” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 498). They put time and care into the creation of this building, so it must have had importance and meaning. “To support this work, the bishop and cathedral officials usually pledged all or part of their incomes for three to five, even ten years” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 501). This also shows how important and meaningful this building was for the community. Both the Pyramids and the Chartres Cathedral were based on a unifying belief that a community shared together.


The Temple of the Inscriptions also seems like it was a very important structure during the Mayan civilization. “...The buildings of Palenque are terraced into the mountains with a series of aqueducts channeling rivers through the urban core. The center of the city houses the palace, the Temple of the Inscriptions, and other temples” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 386). Based on it's location in the city of Palenque, it was definitely an important place. “Next to the palace stands the Temple of the Inscriptions, Pakal the Great's funerary pyramid” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 386). The temple is similar to the Egyptian pyramids because they were both used as a tomb for the community's leader(s). The temple is also similar to both the pyramids and the Chartres Cathedral because all three were based around the community's beliefs. All three of these amazing examples of architecture show how important religion was to each of these civilizations.

Friday, April 13, 2012

ESSAY #6c- Oh, Mamma!

ESSAY #6c- Oh, Mamma!
QUESTION: Describe the similarities of and connections between the cults of Earth goddess Gaia, the Virgin Mary and Devi, the Hindi Mother goddess. Select representative artwork depicting each one and describe the similarities in the imagery.

Part One
Summary: I chose this one because I didn't know much at all about other religions, I just had a feeling they all had much similarities and have always wondered about this, and I find the most interesting topics to be the easiest to write about. I couldn't find information in the text about the earth goddess Gaia, and I could barely find anything online so I used what I could find. I've also gone to protestant church for a long part of my childhood never really knowing what was going on. I thought writing this essay might help me understand a little bit about why people follow religions but I still don't really get it.
Reason: The reason this was created was to give the writer a better outlook on different religions and help them see the similarities between them.
Purpose: The purpose of this question was to expand my knowledge on other religions. It has also helped me see the similarities between these religions and has shown me that they are very much the same.
Direction: Writing about this topic has made me want to learn more about these different religions and their artwork.
Impressions: My impressions are that all religions are truly the same, people just like to pretend they're not for some reason.

Part Two
There are many obvious connections and similarities between the Earth goddess Gaia, the Virgin Mary, Devi and the Hindi Mother goddess. One thing that is blatantly obvious is the fact that all of these religions are based on something that is so unknown and vague. Like the virgin mary for example, she apparently became pregnant with jesus through “divine intervention.” It's just such a strange thing to me that over the years billions of people have revolved their life around something that they know absolutely nothing about. I don't care if anyone does, I personally cannot revolve my life around something that is so uncertain. My religion is science. The main similarity between these “idols” is that they are all women, and they all basically started the religion they represent.

http://www.kusadasi.tv/wp-content/uploads/gaia_greek_goddess.jpg
The Earth goddess Gaia comes from Greek mythology. She is essentially mother earth, giving life to everything we see, and after something's life has ended, it returns back to mother earth. Gaia came into being “out of chaos.” This is a nice concept. Everything on the earth depends on the earth goddess Gaia for life. “In the 1960s, James Lovelock formulated the Gaia hypothesis. It states that all life, and all living things on this planet, are part of a single, all-encompassing global entity or consciousness which he named Gaia. It is this global consciousness, Mother Gaia, that makes our planet capable of supporting life, while our near neighbors in the solar system are barren and lifeless” (http://www.greekmedicine.net/mythology/mythology.html). This sounds extremely similar to other religions. Basically, if you play your role in this world and respect everyone and everything around you, you keep the balance and everything is right in the world.
http://hss.albertlea.k12.mn.us/humanities/slides/unit09/image01.jpg
Christians believe in one God manifest in three persons- the Trinity of Creator-Father (God), Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit-and that Jesus was the Son of God by a human mother, the Virgin Mary” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 222). Like the earth goddess Gaia, the Virgin Mary started it all-meaning Christianity. “Jesus gathered a group of followers, male and female; he performed miracles of healing and preached love of God and neighbor, the sanctity of social justice, the forgiveness of sins, and the promise of life after death” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 222). Like the earth goddess Gaia, Christianity and the Virgin Mary have a positive message for the people who follow. Religion, like stories and myths, are like life lessons to be learned. They are stories- not necessarily something to be taken so seriously as some do. I know of someone who gives directly to his church fifteen percent of his paycheck, this is sad to me. I don't think Jesus would have necessarily wanted that.
http://www.devi.us/devi.jpg
Devi, the Great Goddess, controls material riches and fertility. She has forms indicative of beauty, wealth, and auspiciousness, but also forms of wrath, pestilence, and power. As the embodiment of cosmic energy, she provides the vital force to all the male gods” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 298). “Most Hindus believe in an immense unifying force that governs all existence and cannot be completely known by humanity.” They believe in three main deities: Shiva, Vishnu, and Devi. (http://www.asia.si.edu/pujaonline/puja/basic_beliefs.html) Devi refers to the multiple forms that exist of the Hindu goddess
http://navvis.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/gayathri-mata.jpg
There are many different forms of the Mother goddess in the religion of Hinduism. The three most popular deities are Vishnu, Shiva, and the Great Goddess, Devi (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 298). 

p.s. I can't finish right at this moment because I am extremely confused by the whole Hindi mother goddess vs. Devi and the whole Hinduism thing. I need to think on it for a bit.

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Essay 1a: Them and Us

Essay 1a: Them and Us
Question: How artistically similar, or different, do you think prehistoric people were compared to modern man and, what singular force or need continues to drive the artistic needs and human expressions of the 21st century?

Part One

Summary: I felt as though the answer to this question was slightly obvious, but maybe it's not and I just thought it was. I like how close people used to be to animals and how they were so precise when drawing them on cave walls.

Reason: The reason this question was created was to get the writer to search for the right information to answer the question to the fullest extent. 

Purpose: The purpose of this question is to get the writer to have a different perspective when viewing prehistoric art work and the reasons why they created it.

Direction: Doing this research hasn't really made me think differently because I already thought this way, but maybe the next essays will.

Impressions: I leave this essay wondering how people could think that prehistoric people are different than us in the first place? How could we be unlike something that we originated from?

Part Two

Prehistoric people are very artistically similar to modern man, or not at all, depending on your view point. I would say, in the sense that we still have the same basic needs as prehistoric people, then we are very artistically similar. Many people wouldn't view it this way. But at the end of the day, the only thing that really matters is surviving. What a basic human being needs to survives is food, water, shelter, thought, and a proper habitat where we can receive these things. The way the world is today, people may not see it this way because they are blinded by their differing viewpoints, but that is why this class and these questions were created, to help people build their outlooks and viewpoints. The singular force that drives humans to create art is the need to know the meaning of life and to know why we're here. This is something humans have never stopped wondering.

Spotted horses and human hands. Pech-Merle Cave. Dordogne, France. Horses 25,000-24,000 BCE. Hands c. 15,000. (http://donsmaps.com/images20/pechmerlecopy.jpg)
In the above photo, it shows a cave painting from the Pech-Merle Cave in Dordogne, France. “Yet the painters left more than images of animals, fish, and geometric shapes; they left their own handprints in various places around the animals. These images, and many others hidden in chambers at the ends of long, narrow passages within the cave, connect us to an almost unimaginably ancient world of 25,000 BCE” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.1). In the photo, the handprints are from around 15,000 BCE while the horses are from between 25,000 and 24,000 BCE. The fact that they left their handprints tells me that they wanted people to know that what they put their handprint on was important information. Although modern people may view this art work and think how simple and boring it may look, it was what was important to people at that time. They spent so much time working to get food and simply survive, why would they waste time on entertainment?

Recontruction drawing of mammoth bone houses. c. 16,000-10,000. (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCBuMjxUHpIjITzWPO_0sTf2CLxopLValpIvUA-gzrfgJq1YFt7IDrhSgMLWotgp6uMLKwCL67O0s79ngNO8jipa2KFPJZ1LrJIWGy17Cn1eTnFIs__IJ-qCHSxUy4QRiP3yrameMzFDyB/)
Prehistoric people obviously thought in a different way than we do as modern people. There isn't any way we can find out how they viewed the world and thought about their existence here on the earth. The only thing we can do is realize we are not much different, but our main goals in life are clouded by distractions. At the end of the day, our main purpose is simply to survive, reproduce, and maintain the earth, which is how prehistoric people also lived, therefore nothing much has changed. “The bone framework was probably covered with animal hides and turf. Most activities centered around the inside fire pit, or hearth, where food was prepared and tools were fashioned. Larger houses might have had more than one hearth and spaces were set aside for specific uses- working stone, making clothing, sleeping and dumping refuse” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.4-5). Back then, they still focused their living arrangements on sleeping, eating and working. Really, what much else do we need? The only difference between “them and us” are that we are slightly more advanced in our methods of doing the same exact things. Instead of surviving off the land, we milk it for all it's worth, instead of eating from the earth, we process food until it turns different colors, instead of working outside, we work inside at desks. Which is nowadays considered advanced. I think the boundaries that have been created by the modern world deeply effect the way people express themselves.

 
Archaeologists now think that the people who lived at this time held very different ideas (from our twenty-first-century ones) about what it meant to be a human and how humans were distinct from animals; it is quite possible that they thought of animals and humans as parts of one common group of beings who shared the world” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.6). When I see this quote in a textbook I think- is it necessary to even say this? Of course that's what they thought, because there is not one reason why they wouldn't think this. What would have ever made them think they were superior beings to a lion, for example? Lions might have even been considered by prehistoric man to be superior animal, or at least an equal. I am sure there are people on the planet nowadays that see things in a similar light. People who live and depend on the planet earth for survival. The fact that the above statue was created shows that these people viewed themselves as part of the “outside” world. In modern time, people look at animals and nature as part of some foreign land that they're not a part of. Which explains why they find it difficult to see things from an “outside” perspective, because they don't see themselves as part of it.

Long thought by many as possible abstract or symbolic expressions as opposed to representations of real animals, the famous paleolithic horse paintings found in caves such as Lascaux and Chauvet in France likely reflect what the prehistoric humans actually saw in their natural environment”(http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/september-2011/article/prehistoric-cave-paintings-of-horses-were-spot-on-say-scientists). In other words, prehistoric people obviously cared about what they were drawing, it had some sort of purpose. They wanted to leave it behind for other people to see, they weren't just doing it to pass the time. They painted these animals to be accurate to what they experienced in real life, because many people naturally strived for this. As many people still do today. 
"Many believed that people create art for the sheer love of beauty. Scientists now agree that human beings have an aesthetic impulse, but the effort required to accomplish the great cave paintings suggests their creators were motivated by more than just simple pleasure"(Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.8). People make art to understand what the meaning of life is and to search for some sort of truth. They most likely did art for the same reasons. At the end of the day we are not much different than them, but modern people cannot see these, because of the society we live in.

Thursday, March 1, 2012

Essay #2b: Completeness and Truth

Essay #2b: Completeness and Truth
Question: How is it possible that what the Egyptians considered "completeness", could be misinterpreted as crude, naïve or unrealistic and how does it affect the “truth” contained in their art?

Part One
Summary: I didn't have much trouble answering this question because I already had a lot of prior knowledge on the subject of ancient Egypt. I always found it interesting how they based everything off of mathematics and a lot of their architecture seemed to have to do with astronomy. I always wondered how they could be so accurate without much evidence of complicated machinery and tools.
Reason: The reason this question was created was to have to the student view art and even math in a different light. It was created to have the student search for information about Egyptian art in the textbook and decide how they would answer.
Purpose: The purpose of this question is to show the student a different perspective. It was created to give the student a new perspective.
Direction: The direction of my research has brought me to believe ancient Egyptians were smart.
Impressions: My impressions are that ancient Egyptians are not crude, naïve or unrealistic in anyway, they are in fact the complete opposite.

Part Two
What the Egyptians considered “completeness,” could be misinterpreted as crude, naïve, or unrealistic by the modern person, which could in turn affect the “truth” contained in their art. Crude can mean many things but in this case it means simple or lacking something. Egyptian art can easily be interpreted as naïve, meaning that it is unsophisticated. It may be viewed this way because of the structure of their buildings, the way they depicted humans, or what they depicted in art. I don't see Egyptian art in this way though, so it all depends on the viewer. When looking at Egyptian art, I feel the complete opposite.

(http://ancientworldwonders.com/uploads/Pyramids_of_Giza.jpg)

What many modern viewers don't know is that almost all of Egyptian architecture and art is based on mathematics. This is anything but crude, naïve or unrealistic. Many stones used to create different structures are too heavy for a modern day crane to even carry. The word crude implies that the Egyptians were unprepared, sloppy and unintelligent. This is definitely not the case. An example of this architecture is the Great Pyramids at Giza. “The site was carefully planned to follow the sun's east-west path” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.57). This implies that the ancient Egyptians were extremely far advanced. “The designers who oversaw the building of such massive structures were capable of the most sophisticated mathematical calculations. They oriented the pyramids to the points of the compass and may have incorporated other symbolic astronomical calculations as well” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.57). It's pretty obvious to me based on the photo above that the pyramids were meant to look the way they do. If one single mathematical calculation was off, the entire pyramid could've collapsed, so these people were anything but naïve, crude or unrealistic.

(http://witcombe.sbc.edu/menkaure/images/menkaure.jpg)
People may view the above statue, Menkaure and His Queen, and wonder, why would the egyptians feel the need to create people to look this way? They might even see it and not appreciate it for what it is and might view it as unsightly. For the Egyptians, they view this as a new way to create sculpture. Before, they were only capable of creating statues of people standing straight up. For them to create a statue making a step forward, this is an amazing new discovery and has a lot of meaning to them. “The forms of the sculpture - the measured grid of strong verticals and counterbalancing horizontals, the stiff, artificial postures, the overall idealized anatomical shapes of the bodies combined with naturalistic details - are read not simply as indicative of Egyptian taste, but as representative of the fundamental character of Egyptian culture” (http://witcombe.sbc.edu/menkaure/menkaurediscovery.html). This shows how the Egyptians felt about their looks, culture, and how they appeared to others. It seems as though they were very keen on perfection, based on how they use math. Even if they didn't necessarily look as they looked in carvings, paintings, and statues, that is how they wished to look, or saw themselves.

A modern person might view this and wonder why everything looks like it was drawn so simply. As a modern viewer myself, I first notice the way their feet are both going towards the same direction, even though they are pictured walking. But then, I look more closely and notice at the bottom left what looks like grid paper I used in Algebra class. This shows the ancient Egyptians obsession with perfection. They depicted themselves the way they did simply because they wanted to be remembered in a certain way. I think they did a good job of this. “One of the most striking features of the lowest register of this stele is its unfinished state. The two leftmost figures were left uncarved, but the stone surface still maintains the preparatory ink drawing meant to guide the sculptor, preserving striking evidence of a system of canonical figure proportions that was established in the Middle Kingdom” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.64). This implies the opposite of crude or naïve. They were very intricate and detailed in their work, and cared very much about it. Some things may have been a bit unrealistic, but not enough to be considered unimportant.


In the photo above it shows the Temple of Ramses II. The men sitting down in their thrones may be viewed from a modern perspective and seen as crude, naïve, or unrealistic, based on their appearance. A viewer may see this and automatically think that these men are not proportionate. Their legs look a bit wide compared to their upper bodies and their hands and arms look flat. It may look off to us, but to them it was a new found way to sculpt, and they took advantage of it. Over time, their sculptures become more accurate.


(

(
http://www.oldworldartisans.com/images/Web%20Pages/Fresco%20Styles/Queen_Nefertari_making_an_offering_to_Isis,_tomb_of_Nefertari,_Valley_of_the_Queens,_1279-1212_BC.jpg)
“Her slender limbs, ample hips, and more prominent breasts contrast with the uniformly slender female figures of the New Kingdom” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.78). The first sculpture is Karomama, which is from around 945-715 BCE. The second painting, is from 1290-1224 BCE (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.76-78). This shows how over time they learned how to create more accurate representations of people. In the first sculpture, the woman is shown taking a step forward and also holding her arms up as if she is carrying something. They did this because it was new and amazing for them to be able to sculpt people in different positions of movement.

What the ancient Egyptians considered to be “completeness”, could easily be misinterpreted as crude, naïve, or unrealistic which effects the “truth” contained in their art. To the ancient Egyptians, “completeness” is “truth” because that is what makes sense to them. What was right to them might not seem right to a modern person because many people are only capable of seeing things from their own point of view and not anyone else's. Based on all of the above pieces of art and architecture, I think it's easy to say that ancient Egyptians were very intelligent, logical, and mathematical.

Essay 1b: Perception and Reality

Essay 1b: Perception and Reality
Question: Is it possible for a modern viewer’s "perceptions" to either create or alter the "reality" of a specific Paleolithic, Mesolithic or Neolithic Period cave painting or carving?

Part One

Summary: While writing this essay I felt confused and unsure of what direction to take because I don't have that much prior knowledge of the subject, which is why it took me so long to hand it in. I'm an indecisive person in the first place so I thought I should continue to read up on the subject until I felt sure of what I had written.

Reason: The reason this question was created was to get the writer to think objectively in the future when looking at different pieces of art from different periods of time. It was made to have the student learn about Paleolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic cave paintings and carvings.

Purpose: The purpose of this question is to open the students mind and help them think differently in the future towards art and also other things.

Direction: Writing this essay has led me in a new direction. I already had an open mind when it came to viewing art but now I acknowledge that many people don't have this knowledge naturally, but it doesn't take much to open your mind.

Impressions: I leave this essay wondering how ancient Egyptians built pyramids just simply with physical labor. I find this extremely hard to believe and will always wonder about how they did it.

Part Two

A person views the world based on what they've witnessed throughout their life, so it's only natural for one to alter the “reality” of any work of art from any time period. For many, it might be almost impossible to imagine what people from these Periods of time may have experienced, based on how spoiled and dependent our culture has become. For some people, it seems to be difficult to see things from another's point of view, let alone someone from another time period.
Chauvet Cave. Vallon-Pont-d'Arc, Ardeche Gorge, France. c. 32,000-30,000 BCE. Paint on limestone)(http://filmshotfreezer.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/chauvet_cave_paintings1.jpg)

“The earliest known site of prehistoric cave paintings, discovered in December 1994, is the Chauvet Cave near Vallon-Pont-d'Arc in south-eastern France-a tantalizing trove of hundreds of paintings. The most dramatic of the images depict grazing, running, or resting animals, including wild horses, bison, mammoths, bears, panthers, owls, deer, aurochs, woolly rhinoceroses, and wild goats” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 9). A modern person might see any of these Paleolithic cave paintings and think they were just painting what they saw every day while trying to hunt for food. But, people thought differently back then, and they were drawing these animals for very different reasons than purely entertainment. They drew these animals because of what is referred to as target bonding; they thought when they killed an animal to eat it they were capturing its spirit and to create a new life they had to paint hundreds of animals. Modern people may see this as slightly insane, but it was a time where Homo sapiens brains were evolving and new ways of thought were emerging.
(Lascaux Cave. Dordogne, France. c. 15,000 BCE. Paint on limestone.) (
http://genealogyreligion.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/lascaux.jpg)
Another example of a cave filled with Paleolithic paintings is the Lascaux Cave in southern France. “Painters worked not only in large caverns, but also far back in the smallest chambers and recesses, many of which are almost inaccessible today. Small stone lamps found in such caves- over 100 lamps have been found at Lascaux- indicate that the artists worked in flickering light from burning animal fat.”(Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg. 10). To me, this implies that the people who painted in these caves worked very hard to do so. They went deep into the caves to almost inaccessible places just to depict the animals that they hunted and saw everyday. Many people may view these cave paintings and think they did it merely to pass the time and entertain themselves, but it was almost the complete opposite of this. This seems almost impossible to think- why would these people feel the need to work so hard to just simply draw on cave walls? They felt that they needed to paint these animals to give their spirit back, which would explain why there is so many. When people started drawing cave paintings, people also starting thinking in different ways.
(Lascaux Cave. c. 15,000 BCE. Paint on limestone.) (
http://www.donsmaps.com/images25/manbisonrhino.jpg)
Another example of a Paleolithic painting found in the Lascaux Cave, depicts a hunter that killed a bison and a woolly rhinoceros escaping. The bison and rhinoceros are accurate, while the hunter is described as a stick figure. (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.11). This also shows how much care was put into the cave paintings of animals. This might imply that people painted in caves to leave behind an interpretation of simple everyday events to work as a learning tool for the next people to see them. If people just evolved to have conscious thought they're going to think about a lot of things and of course naturally look for ways express these thoughts, but what it all comes down to at the end of the day is survival- and that's really all. So these cave paintings were based on survival. “...There has always been agreement that decorated caves must have had a special meaning because people returned to them time after time over many generations, in some cases over thousands of years” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.8). This shows that people received something meaningful when visiting these cave paintings, otherwise the story wouldn't be passed on.

Something many people nowadays may have trouble to understand is the connection that humans had with nature and how much they relied on it just to exist on a daily basis. “ ...They balanced hunting, gathering, farming, and animal breeding in order to maintain a steady food supply.” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.13). We still rely on the earth for food, but people don't even realize this fact, because people are so removed from everything. Also during the Neolithic period housing structures began to become more complex. “...Simple but durable structures made of clay, mud, drung, and straw interwoven among wooden posts.” (Art History, Marilyn Stokstad, Michael W. Cothren, Pg.13). This is where everything we have in our modern world began, by these occurrences which took place thousands of years ago. They relied on nothing but what the Earth had given them at that time, and no one in the modern world seems to acknowledge this. They may understand the concept, but could never fully comprehend what these people had to do to survive.

In conclusion, it is possible for a modern viewer's perceptions to create or alter the reality of any cave painting or carving. I don't think it's possible for a viewer to not alter the reality of a cave painting or carving because the viewer is not and never will be a person from the Paleolithic, Mesolithic, or Neolithic period, therefore they could never truly understand how that person felt. I have dreams of living on a farm, but I still can't begin to imagine what it's like to hunt, kill, sleep, bathe, and exist merely from what is on the planet Earth. Unfortunately there are definitely people who still have to live like this everyday of their lives.