By Laurencia Victoria
The visual arts have been a product of visual delight throughout life, and there are disciplines and limits involved in which various artists have formalized themselves over time. However, nature and standards of beauty have played a great role in the respective artistic compositions, from Greek antiquity to the present. We manifest a kind of mimesis in the face of matter that allows itself to be molded and transformed, to provoke in the viewer so many thoughts and feelings throughout the history of humanity. Certain personalities have been part of this artistic appreciation and criticism, where they focus their visual point on the plastic manifestation, inspired by the master product of nature. However, the appreciation of artistic beauty is changing but maintains its eternity as long as the public is able to detect and contemplate said element. Despite our 21st century reading writings between the 18th and 20th centuries, we still tend to use characteristics of antiquity and the past itself to determine what is beautiful in the contemporary, when we should not mix the determinations of our past with the movements of our present.
Based on the definition of art by Denis Diderot in “Judgement and the Public Sphere”, art is an abstract metaphysics. Man began collecting observations based on nature, and from those materials the function, use and qualities of these beings and their symbols. He gives the name of science or art to the point of focus where they fixed the observation of it, eventually creating a series of instruments and rules aimed at such an object. However, this is a perspective from the 18th century, where we have not yet come across the movements that will little by little break with this perspective. Diderot also adds that the general purpose of art is to impress specific forms on a basic element provided by nature; In order to deform matter, we must first master it in its natural environment, regardless of its shape, size and mass. He implies that the artist must be aware of the complete behavior of his environment, in order to capture and reconstruct.
On the other hand, John Ruskin questions us in his Selections: from “the Realization” (2005) that it is not what we can paint, but how far we can go to paint. How far can humans go using nature to reach an aesthetically beautiful level in art? The elements that each artist decides to be part of a composition are very useful in determining the education, discipline and creativity of this individual. That is, these elements will be highly provocative and close to a possible reality, even if we know that they are not entirely real or existing in nature (like the figures that Ruskin mentions that may be able to move even though they are captured in a two-dimensional medium). ). An individual is also attracted by the beauty, complexity and selection in colors, which provide interest in taking up personal anecdotes while delighting. Something like “taking back the visual aspects as if we were mirrors” and giving them that aesthetic importance. The artist should not be considered good for his ability to manipulate only, but also for the details he employs in his composition.
Johann Winckelmann mentions that one must become familiar with the art of the ancestors, in order to become the best artists, and in this he is right when it comes to creating new trends in art. It is not the fact of imitating the artists of Greek antiquity but because they let themselves be carried away by nature, and in it was perfection. Winckelmann highlights here the mobility of the nerves and muscles in the various structures of the bodies of those pieces that he at some point contemplated by Raphael Sanzio and Michelangelo. One of the most distinctive characteristics of the art of Greek antiquity is the noble simplicity and silent grandeur mixed between posture and expression. The piece of Laoconte and the Sons of him by Agesander, Polydorus and Athenodorus of Rhodes is taken as an example to highlight the meticulous study of human anatomy such as facial joints, muscle tensions and other parts of the body that reflect the expression of pain without fear. The calmer the state of the body, the more was the ability to portray the real personality of the soul in the midst of sublime suffering. However, it is very notable that these sculpted expressions are not on par with what a human being would actually be feeling or experiencing, but they present the dominance of the human figure in mythological scenes.
In various sections of The Painter of Modern Life (1863), Charles Baudelaire talks about the approach of art fans: not everything is in those high-caliber artists who have demonstrated mastery of the mimesis and classicism that has lasted until then in artists. like Rafael, previously mentioned. The artistic compositions of the past may seem of great interest to us to be able to create today, not only because of the high aesthetic level that these works can express to viewers but also because of their historical and cultural value. However, it is not material to continue saturating as has been customary for centuries. But we can perform this same exercise before the creations of our present; Beauty is an invariable, eternal, and difficult to determine element, which will depend on fashion, time, morality, and passion.
In “The Moment of Art” by Émile Zola, he expresses that a work of art is, on the contrary, an expression of the personality of an individual rather than a mimesis: everything that makes up the artist, his body and soul, is deposited, and that clearly It expresses the strength and uniqueness of his mind, the rawness and strength of his personality, and that he takes nature in his hands to manipulate it firmly in front of us as he decides to perceive it. This means that in the present we have stopped using mimesis to delight in art and little by little the artist is freed to simply produce life, the creation of something never seen by the eyes of the creator and his temperament. Two elements of artistic work are also added to this, which are nature as an element of reality and the human being as a personal element; Unlike the others, Zola provides that esteem so that the rest of the artistic community does not set the limit on the form and aesthetics of nature, but rather that the personal and individual essence of the maker is considered part of the creative process and result.
Beauty and nature have always been progenitors of the greatest designs and artistic creations that have been transformed over time, releasing their freedom to manipulate themselves into forms outside of reality. Depending on the circumstance, history and artistic education, we can also determine those elements that the viewer uses to determine what is art. However, our artists will always start with the legacy of our historical antiquity to leave a small legacy in our society. An element that beauty and nature share are these much-mentioned eternity and evolution, where the viewer focuses his eye and delights in a different element, but in an essential piece of the vital and individual experience of any artist.
Laurencia Victoria
Official Member (2016 – present)
Graphic Designer and Public Relations collaborator
Professor of Digital Graphic Design – NUC University
Master’s Degree in Digital Graphic Design from Atlantic University College
Bachelor’s Degrees in Fine Arts and Art Theory – University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus