nina_dS ([info]nina_ds) wrote,
2005-09-11 16:23:00

The Byzantine look

Herein is art historical-type comparison of Byzantine mosaics and a little boy who might be a martyr but, sadly, not the ambrosial cup-bearer, the archangel, nor the virgin represented within...



Scotty Fisher

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

"Ambrosia"

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

archangel

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

virgin

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

I'm not 100% sure of periodicization, but I think the tilted head comes from the earlier period, and it becomes a little "stiffer", with the full-faced representation later on, but I don't remember. Slavic icons often have the tilted head for the Madonna, but not for any other figure, and male saints are almost always full-face, I suppose because of the submissive implications.

It's the whole cut of his face that reminds me: the eyebrow-nose-shape of the eyes complex (especially in the archangel icon), the mouth, and the angle of the tilt of the head. Interesting that the closest representations I could find were either of female figures or of "youths" who are coded as sexually available...

I can't believe that the good folks at Law & Order were doing this intentionally (I think they were just feeling lucky that they could find a kid to pull off this complicated part!), but it's interesting nonetheless.


  • Post a new comment

    Error

    switch

    Your IP address will be recorded 

     
    Help
  • 22 comments

[info]aingeal8c

September 11 2005, 21:20:22 UTC 6 years ago

Ah thanks for these. I couldn't find any on the web as such and the scanner is attached to the other computer...

But even from the paintings it is the femine form that seems to dominate even among the male Saints. I assume this is something to do with godliness.....I do wonder why this is. Is it an attempt to make the Saints neuter and de-sexulaise them the way we do to children becuase oddly the oppostite affect seems to be true.

[info]pro_f_iler

September 11 2005, 22:28:00 UTC 6 years ago

the femine form that seems to dominate even among the male Saints. I assume this is something to do with godliness

I think you are absolutely correct. Whether it is true or not, that seems to be the prevailing notion, that femininity=godliness far more than masculinity does. And perhaps that's why. Because most of the artists are men, and men tend to think this way. I, myself, find it oddly comforting to think of any deity possessing such immense power as having feminine traits.

[info]aingeal8c

September 11 2005, 22:32:13 UTC 6 years ago

I think you are absolutely correct. Whether it is true or not, that seems to be the prevailing notion, that femininity=godliness far more than masculinity does. And perhaps that's why. Because most of the artists are men, and men tend to think this way. I, myself, find it oddly comforting to think of any deity possessing such immense power as having feminine traits.

Showing my inner archaeologist again...
when looking at Near Eastern prehistory and the genesis of relgion the fallback idea was for many years the idea of fertility and godess cults rather than a masculine god. This has since been disproved but the feminine godess in prehsitory is a recurrent theme in archaeology which suggets the ideas of fmeininity being godliness is not a new one.

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 00:49:38 UTC 6 years ago

There are two opposing impulses, really - the controlling and the nurturing. Hey, guess which is which! One argument for the persistence of the Marian cult in Catholicism is that the Mosaic god is so masculine in the sense of lawgiver, disciplinarian, etc. I think it's probably easier to cope with a wholly nurturing god concept than a wholly controlling one.

[info]pro_f_iler

September 12 2005, 04:46:37 UTC 6 years ago

Wow. I would just like to state that, at this point, between the two of you, my head is now officially exploding with great pyrotechnic showers of light and color. Discussions like these remind me why I love LJ so much.

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 18:21:21 UTC 6 years ago

::hands you asbestos beanie to contain the fireworks::

This has been fun, eh?

[info]aingeal8c

September 12 2005, 07:31:34 UTC 6 years ago

I think it's probably easier to cope with a wholly nurturing god concept than a wholly controlling one.

I agree and if we have a creation myth we asssume that the god in question, have birth to the human race and therefore was like a mother who cared and nutured her young. Howeveer when you look at the Jewish God this God was also like a stern parent who let children go out on their own. BUt the Christian God is more caring and forgiving.

Looking at the Roman traditon you have the mix of the strong masculine influence such as Jupiter and Mars but you still have the soft female like Aphrodite. Then you have the part way mix like Apollo who's face is depicted in a childlike/feminine way. But whose body is very muscular.

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 18:56:32 UTC 6 years ago

Howeveer when you look at the Jewish God this God was also like a stern parent who let children go out on their own. BUt the Christian God is more caring and forgiving.

True, in theory, but we have Old Testament/New Testament, and a lot of Christian fundies, in this country at least, actually are more Old Testament in their conception of God, faith, etc. I mean, they're conservatives and all about getting and keeping their own. If you suggest that, hey, Jesus was a liberal (love your neighbor, do unto others, take care of each other, do not be selfish, etc.) I don't know if they'd have a comeback, but they don't follow Jesus's teachings and yet dare to call themselves Christian. Boggles the freakin' mind.

[info]aingeal8c

September 12 2005, 20:42:29 UTC 6 years ago

Christian fundies, in this country at least, actually are more Old Testament in their conception of God, faith, etc. I mean, they're conservatives and all about getting and keeping their own.

I know what you mean. I have always said that the first thing Jesus wouold do if he happened to come back would not be to go and speak to the Pope or other church leaders but go out among the AIDS victims, the poor and the ingnored becuase that was what he did. The whole loving thy neighbour seems to have gone out the window for a lot of church people Jesus preaced tolernace after-all.

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 00:55:48 UTC 6 years ago

Is it an attempt to make the Saints neuter and de-sexulaise them the way we do to children becuase oddly the oppostite affect seems to be true.

Oh, boy, now here's a tricky, tricky bit. The more we try to desexualize something/someone, the more they are opened up to eroticization. Have you ever seen any of those Shirley Temple shorts from the early 1930s, when she was 3-5? They seem like out-and-out child exploitation now. Did they seem like that then?

And I do think that there is some element of that, strangely enough, in the depiction of Charlie. He is both feminized and made childlike. Having his hair in those ringlets makes makes him girly, childlike, and sensual. At the same time we're given all these clues about his innocence. I've seen it happen to female characters before, but I can't think of any male character that's given this sort of treatment - at least not one who is physically adult.

[info]aingeal8c

September 12 2005, 07:37:52 UTC 6 years ago

Oh, boy, now here's a tricky, tricky bit. The more we try to desexualize something/someone, the more they are opened up to eroticization.

I agree and the Shirley Temple example is a briliant one becuase at the time they were nice, sweet innnocent movies and yet there is this uncomfortbale undertone. I picutre Victorian examples of Ladie's modesty but the counter was then if a lady simply lifted up her skirt that was erotic. Today's society seems to have gone the opposite way putting sex into advertising, pictures etc. and yet as a result erotica takes on more extreme forms.

And I do think that there is some element of that, strangely enough, in the depiction of Charlie. He is both feminized and made childlike.

Yes they have very much made him seem like that and I do wonder why. Is it purely to recreate the image of the innocent. Or is it suggestive of contrasting the mathematical genius, the adult being int he NUMB3RS with the lack of life experience becuase Charlie has been cocooned in academia?

[info]kellis_amberlee

September 11 2005, 21:36:10 UTC 6 years ago

Now I really want to see that episode, but alas, Netflix doesn't have season 4.

[info]nina_ds

September 11 2005, 23:28:28 UTC 6 years ago

I know. I think they're up to S3 though. I keep waiting for it to roll around on TNT again so I can get a better copy and burn to DVD (the tape is just about to fall apart because it's old). It's one of the more sensationalistic episodes, because poor Scotty is just (and I don't mean to make light of it) screwed by everybody in this episode. I hope they had some psychological backup, like they did for Jodie Foster for Taxi Driver!

[info]kellis_amberlee

September 12 2005, 09:01:10 UTC 6 years ago

I keep waiting for it to roll around on TNT again so I can get a better copy and burn to DVD (the tape is just about to fall apart because it's old).

Could you let me know if it does?

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 18:24:47 UTC 6 years ago

Absolutely. Ah, the joys of TiVo.

[info]pro_f_iler

September 11 2005, 22:17:49 UTC 6 years ago

I can't believe that the good folks at Law & Order were doing this intentionally (I think they were just feeling lucky that they could find a kid to pull off this complicated part!), but it's interesting nonetheless.

Oh, I am quite sure the L&O powers that be didn't intend that. You give them too much credit to look for that in a child guest star. But...

It's the whole cut of his face that reminds me: the eyebrow-nose-shape of the eyes complex (especially in the archangel icon), the mouth, and the angle of the tilt of the head. Interesting that the closest representations I could find were either of female figures or of "youths" who are coded as sexually available...

What I find fascinating is that, intentional or not, that is exactly what TPTB at Numb3rs were looking for in casting Charlie. Apparently, they were very specific about the look; they even asked DK not to cut his hair. I think the unintentional, unconscious "coding" is most interesting. I

Thank you for the beautiful examples.

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 00:26:36 UTC 6 years ago

Intentionality is a tricky beast. People can be "intentional" and be clunky. Sometimes thing happen by accident that are just right.

Apparently, they were very specific about the look; they even asked DK not to cut his hair.

I think this happened between the original Pilot (where he does have short hair) and the second one (has any other show since Star Trek had two pilots? I don't think so...).

One thing I keep meaning to bring up but can never remember except when I'm away from the computer is the conflation of "feminine" and "child" in Charlie. Those usually overlap anyway, but it seems particularly intense here, because the dualities are cut a little differently than usual (for instance, Charlie is both logic and emotion). But I think his hair plays into this - he looks like Shirley Temple.

Thank you for the beautiful examples.

My pleasure!

[info]asemic

September 12 2005, 01:34:09 UTC 6 years ago

Hi, I hope you don't mind me commenting, but I found you through [info]pro_f_iler's F-list.

We actually discussed the head tilt that you mentioned in your original post in one of my art classes. Such a gesture is both a symbol of Her reverence for the Child and the universal connection that a mother has with a child. Even when not pictured with Him, she still has such a movement due to her spiritual bond with the religion. Hope I didn't bore you straight off.

I totally agree with how physically striking he is. That picture of him from L&O really demonstrates how beautiful and classic his features are. This Byzantine icon shares the same eyes and the contradictory seductive/demure look DK has, especially seen in this image from Structural Corruption. I'm also impressed at how in control he is of his features, even at such a young age.

Also, if you don't mind, I'm going to friend you. ^^

[info]pro_f_iler

September 12 2005, 04:40:03 UTC 6 years ago

This Byzantine icon shares the same eyes and the contradictory seductive/demure look DK has, especially seen in this image from Structural Corruption.

Thank you for those striking visual aids, R. I love that Charlie picture.

I think I learned about the Madonna's head tilt in art history class. The "virgin" mosaic Nina posted above is actually what I grew up knowing as Our Lady of Perpetual Help (or Our Lady of Perpetual Succour, depending on what country you are in). The obscured lower right part of that mosaic is where the image of the Christ Child on her lap should be.

Dorky Pro_f_iler says: "It isn't demureness at all then? How disappointing." *g*

I do love the demure femininity in the features of some of the non-Judeo-Christian gods.

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 18:31:58 UTC 6 years ago

Oh, I forgot to comment on the head tilt! That does make sense about the Madonna, because it's prevalent all over. What's interesting is that it seems that in the earlier representations, you have a wider variety of characters adopting the pose, from the archangel to the virgin to the male servant (cup-bearer being a kind of euphemism for male courtesan). But it gets "cleaned up" increasingly, toward purity and divinity, but there's this underlying element of sexuality. So, [info]pro_f_iler, I think there is a trace of demureness/seductiveness that is retained.

And tell me that's not what's going on with Charlie... I mean, really, people. Even if his conscious is clueless, his body and subconscious aren't.

[info]asemic

September 12 2005, 21:40:27 UTC 6 years ago

I think there is a trace of demureness/seductiveness that is retained.

Definately. It's the curves that are incorportated into the piece. Although the positioning of the actors in the work are stiff, the most important features of the face (lips, eyes, nose) are graceful in their curves. The full lips, the heavy lidded eyes, and the sweep of the nose have sensual and erotic qualities to them.

Charlie has all of these qualities. Even his hair, thick and spiraled and feminine, adds to that contradictive nature.

[info]nina_ds

September 12 2005, 18:20:16 UTC 6 years ago

Welcome, welcome!! Friend away... And I shall friend you, too. (I admit I have been reading your Don/Coop stories and not commenting, shame on me.)

I love that shot from Structural Corruption (you know, the episode co-starring the above-the-right-eye ringlet).

That picture of him from L&O really demonstrates how beautiful and classic his features are.

I have always been a bit flabbergasted by those who find him unattractive; even as a child - heck, even as Joel in AFV, he was cute as a bug. But then, I think Brad Pitt and Matt Damon are unattractive, so all taste is subjective, I suppose!

But yes, his control, even as a child was where this started, and continues to amaze me.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…