Why did Neolithic art look so abstract?

Because these are probably self-made examples of 'vulgar art' (i.e. (not professional cottage industry). Most likely they are fertility or birth charms. They weren't meant to look realistic.

Meanwhile, there are cave paintings just as old that are pretty freakin' realistic.

THAT IS PALEOLITHIC, NOT NEOLITHIC.

T H I C C

Entire top row is dragon dildos.

It's all either T H I C C or its P H A L L I C C

Fertility is all important.

Pretty accurate desu.

because they were only human on an abstract level. I mean think about it, a few generations prior they were essentially animals.

The documentary Cave of Forgotten Dreams is practically a religious experience in my opinion

they're generally accepted to be fertility idols
there's a theory they're like that because they're based on pregnant women

no it takes practice
any average joe can draw a realistic portait if they put in the effort
t. average joe who put in the effot

skill is gained by practice (and knowledge)

*realism takes precise tools
ftfy

Which culture made the one in 2nd row 2nd column?

This one?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Brassempouy

Modern humans have been modern since basically 50,000 years ago. Suddenly at this point, there seems to be an explosion in crafted artifacts found. Before 50,000 years, relatively uncommon. Agriculture was still 40,000 years off. It's believed there was some kind of 'language revolution', perhaps when sophisticated clan and territories became somewhat more solidified, or humans stopped being roaming nomads and more or less stayed within a fixed region.

Before that, they were still human, but a little more genetically/phenotypically archaic. Yet we still had the knowledge to make fire, to sew, to make sophisticated stone axes and arrowheads, to make tents and huts.

Go to a cave IRL. It's fucking awesome. I went to one in southern France, it's not super famous but you can take a guided tour 2km into a cave. There was a dozen cave drawings of horses, deer, lions, bison/aurochs, rhino, sometimes mammoth.

>art in one post

>benis in vagina

What are the odds that all the fertility statues are based on actual fat women? Is there any way a woman in those times could have gotten as fat as some of the idols?

I swear I've seen you everywhere on other boards.

Because it is symbolic art. Those are fertility tokens / charms / fetishes what have you. The same way early christians used a poorly drawn fish as a symbol.

Because Richard Dawkins is a spastic and these are fakes he made when he invented Evolutionism.

Art is seldom about realism

Sure if she's a bitch who has her man feed her all the time.
It's not like they were starving back then.

youtube.com/watch?v=eO-c7n1FpCc

...

Realism takes skill, because you can't just do whatever you want to do, abstract art is often times just an excuse used by those who can't properly create any art.

>neolithic
What the fuck is this even supposed to mean?

Do atheists just invent words out of thin-air about ancient antiquity because they hate the bible?

Think of all that game, unhindered natural habitat. Muh spear hunting. And that's your one job, bitches do everything else.

neo=new
lithic=stone age

new stone age

which is of course not when these venus figures were made

>stone age
And what is this supposed to mean?

They are just buzzwords that evolutionists use to fit their worldview of "millions of years". If you accept the Biblical worldview of 6000 years, there's no such thing as bronze or stone age.

stone age means that tools are made of stone
bronze age is when tools are made of bronze
iron age is when things are made of iron

every region has different time-ranges for those eras.

Tools were made of stone, bronze and iron at the same time. There was no "slow progression" between these things.

Stone and bronze are relatively easy and mass made, whereas iron is harder therefore more rarer until the later centuries when blacksmiths became better.

There was no bronzeworking in the neolithic

Bronze has been used in literally all ancient armies except for some isolated black tribes who live deep in the forests of wherever.

Neolithic was before those ancient times.
Stone tools were used, then copper.

>Neolithic was before those ancient times
So.. before the Flood?

Archeological discoveries suggest that the antediluvian civilization had better technology than antiquity.

>you can't do whatever you want to do
But that's exactly what highly skilled individuals tend to do and why their abstract work looks so great. Just look at Picasso's early work. Realistic. But not his voice.

>Veeky Forums: the post

Not an argument, retard.

the flood is not an argument.

>Historic events are not arguments

Here's your last reply.

Are we talking about the Noah flood?

Because else I'd say the only remotely similar flood I can think of, is the sinking of Doggerland.

The world-wide flood that happened around 2500 BC.

The global flood that all ancient cultures and civilizations talked about (Chinese even mention 8 people surviving it).

The global flood that you, as an edgy atheist, reject because you hate God and so pretend these things never happened.

/discussion

Then why hasn't photography made every other form of visual art obsolete? Why go see Michelangelo's David in Florence when you can see Chad Thundercock's gym-selfies on Instagram?

You gotta try harder with your baits, son

>troll calling someone else troll

2/10 for the effort

If a Veeky Forums thread (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will mention the flood.

Clearly some women could get that fat. It probably was not common. People back then could starve to death or suffer malnutrition (specific deficiencies), especially in winter or if game couldn't be found, but generally they had enough.

There is enough physical evidence, from a timespan over 20,000 years or more -- let that sink in -- that these statuettes were relatively unchanged over that span. That means a specific belief, culture and means of passing down that culture -- language. Human statuettes with bear or lion heads are also found, though less often. Again, these span many tens of millennia. They had a specific cultural meaning.

Probably bate, but whatever. Look it up, retard.

troll a little less obviously.

You can post spiderman pics there, kiddo.

>Do atheists just invent words out of thin-air about ancient antiquity because they hate the bible?
Wait, you didn't know that?
Oh, my poor little homeschooled Christfag. Better spend your weekly internet hour on answersingenesis.org from now on.

I think biblical timelines and mythology and how it relates to history is fascinating, but I wish they'd keep it in their threads. I feel like Veeky Forums has been bombarded by Christian shitposters or regular shitposters trying to make Christians look retarded

youtube.com/watch?v=eVoYWXQLoWw

Some bushman stone drawings are pretty damn accurate in the depictions of a gallop, the foreshortening of limbs of people and the like. These expressions were discovered in a vacuum.
In contrast = european, especially old was always more concerned with message, either of beauty, power or awe of religion. To get this through you need abstraction

What if it's not abstract?
What if they cut women's hands and legs and stuffed those women with food?

You and hitler would get along

Because one obviously took much more skill than the other.

Just craftmanship isn't enough, and photorealistic painting is boring as hell. You want a visceral reaction

until you get to the point where its boring

Homemade porn always emphasizes the sex characteristics currently fetishized.

Naturalism is not really all that common a goal in art history/