Why is Byzantine art so shit compared to actual non-larpy Roman art

Why are you comparing a mosaic with a sculpture?

They moved on from it. It went out of fashion. From around the fourth century on, realistic sculpture was considered obsolete and sort of kitschy, the same way we think of Thomas Kinkade paintings today, technically competent and pretty to look at but not really worth paying for. Symbolic art with exaggerated or simplified features started to be considered a higher form of art. Realistic art still survived into the Late Roman period but it was mostly in the form of art meant to be consumed by peasantry, things like decorated crockery and wall panels.

Source:
R. R. R. Smith, Late Antique Portraits in a Public Context: Honorific Statuary at Aphrodisias in Caria, A.D.300-600, Journal of Roman Studies 89 (1999)

They had great architecture though

To be honest, most of the good Byzantine art was probably destroyed during iconoclasm, stolen and carried off to Venice during the crusades or rebranded as Muslim bu the ottomans

confirmation bias intensifies

Can someone please explain to me how this isn't more impressive than that dull ass sculpture?

Byzaboos are the worst

kind of explains how today art is a vapid wasteland

Why does Spanish art put all others to shame?

Not an argument.

The byzantines worked wonders with mosaics, just because it doesn't have a realistic aesthetic doesn't make it bad

>act like a retard
>try and voice your kindergarten tier opinions about something you clearly don't understand
>get btfo immediately
>'b-byzaboo!'
Stay buttblasted.

Mosaic byzantine

>shit

Check your taste man

Why is Veeky Forums so full of brainlets?

Not the Eastern Roman Empire's fault you have such shit taste :^)

This bust must have directly inspired that 80's-90's Disney style.

No, seriously that's, what? Five retarded comments proven wrong with a single picture?
This place really is a shithole of stupidity sometimes.

I am Greek and never knew this painting. Thank you.

>Eastern Roman Empire

You mean Greek Vassal State of Ottoman

Orthodox christianity. They have a very limited view on aesthetics.

Religion

lol look at this cross eyed retard

How did they go from this...

...to this?

Second one is objectively better, you numale roach meme pepe low test cuck!

Was this designed by a 5 year old?

The Venetians stole all the good shit.

...

>i thought that picture on the right was a piece of incan art for the longest time...
that's because you are retarded

Christianity influence

I quite like the style but the actual proportions are a bit fucked for my taste.

...

...

Thanks for proving his point, since you lack the brain cells to understand symbolism in art.

>Roman Catholicism artistically redeemed itself
>Orthodoxy still making icons in OP's style

>shitty art style
>actually on purpose and 2deep4u

>citing a source to back up your claims
THIS ISN'T THE BOARD I KNOW AND LOVE

its like pixel art of the past

just a style

If you like the path western Wuropean art took in late medieval times when it broke from copying the Byzantine style, you have Tuscany to thank for it.

Say thanks.

What's that picture supposed to prove?

Realism = materialism = non spiritual paganism

The stylized perspectives and depictions in Byzantine and other early Christian art were a conscious movement away from the paganism of the outside world.

It is no coincidence artists returned to both realism and pagan themes during the renaissance when stuff like this starts reappearing. This is part of why Nietzsche hypes up the renaissance saying it was the greatest chance Europe had ever had when "Christianity had ceased to occupy the papal chair."

The ancient Greco-Roman world showed itself capable to create all sorts of art, including the very symbolic, the Byzantines just stuck to making almost badly-drawn icons even though they could do better as evidenced to a degree by things like the Paris Psalter or Manuel Panselenus's work.

Compare El Greco's older Byzantine-style workds with his later ones. What exactly did they lose? Just goes to show that the early Christian ideology that continued to reign in Byzantium really held them back, was the case with the ancient Greek mathematical works they possessed in their own language but neglected because pagan!

These are two depictions of the authors of the Gospels, both from the 9th century, one from Germany and one from Ireland

Would you say one is outright better than the other?

>non spiritual paganism

are you ignorant or just retarded?

>renaissance
>when "Christianity had ceased to occupy the papal chair
What?

>guys, these fucking pagans made all these realistic and aesthetically pleasing pieces of art
>let's make every single image of ours look like absolute shit to praise Jesus
The enlightenment could've have come soon enough.

>The enlightenment
>What is the Renaissance
You neopagans need to stop warping things.

Christianity was autistic too. Olden times were autistic as shit in general with our perfect hindsight. 90% (generous) of everyone didn't know their dicks from their butts.

>what's the Renaissance
A period of time where there was a flourishing of science and art, granted as long as it was condoned by the church. The enlightenment is what really helped the west get rid of retards like puritans or other fundamentalists who would want to ban things.

Okay I more or less agree with that. Your previous made it seem like there was supposedly nothing of worth in the realm of art in predominately Christian nations until the enlightenment.

Eurganatans can't do that.

>granted as long as it was condoned by the church
they were the only game in town wealthy enough to invest in those things.

The only reason Galileo Galilei had a career is because of the church's patronage. They got him to shut the hell up because that's what happens when you brazenly run around bad mouthing the guy signing your paychecks.

Russian Orthodox painting is some of the most spiritually moving work ever

I actually like the Irish one better

Thanks for this. It's amazing.

it's almost like the majority of the Orthodox world was being oppressed by the Ottomans

This
Honestly not sure, if that is the point he is trying to make or not. The Irish one is precise and intricate, easy to digest, and all around beautiful to look at where as the Carolingian one just looks borderline sloppy. It seems beyond a doubt which one is better in my eyes.
But given half the posts I've seen in this thread already, it is really not surprising to me that Veeky Forums has terrible artistic taste.

pic related, close up look at some of the detailing seen in the book of kells

>generalized loss of expertise during the late imperial pestilencies
>shift of focus from statues to decoration and from realism/aesthetics to formulaic symbolism
>iconoclasm destroying said decorations and developed expertise

Insular art was a mistake.

It has less to do with that and more to do with the post-Iconoclast Byzantine world creating a dogmatic ruleset for religious art. That's the main reason why it showed little growth for almost a millennium.

except that Constantinople used to have entire statues of famous Greeks and Romans decorating the city until the 4th crusade destroyed everything

Nikolai Ge is patrician

Is that Rasputin?

That's Christ and Pilatus

...

>[...]Porn[...].jpg

Having classical examples around you doesn't mean you want to or will make use of them in your art.

if they wanted to they would've destroyed them since they're basically idolatric statues but chose not to, besides a huge percentage of Byzantine art has been destroyed from the crusaders, which is why you don't see much of it now

>Byzantines
>Europeans

>Byzaboos trying to talk up their mosaics
lmao sit down

aesthetically, it's pretty meh, but it's really fascinating how artwork was used interstate relations to deal with the persians, huns, arabs, slavs, goths, and so on. the roman conceptions of property influenced their view of politically binding gifts, and so they would often try to give gifts to influence other states if they shared a religious link (sending religious artwork to kiev), cultural link (sending greco-roman stuff to whoever was interested in a hellenistic revival), or scaring the shit out of some barbarians. not sure if a 'display' counts as artwork, but they would have very elaborate, decadent, and precise exhibitions whenever they received or sent out a convoy, irregardless of the economic troubles they were having. diplomats were very well trained, and were often religious if they shared a religious link with who they were visiting. it often involved a very symbolic subordination to the imperial majesty whenever they were dealing with people they weren't afraid of. things got more desperate after Constantinople fell. check out the Book of Ceremonies if you're interested in a primary source. also Byzantine Art and Diplomacy in an age of decline by Cecily Hilsdale is a great secondary one.

I was there last week, it was more impressive than the sculptures

Yes but they were not using them as icons of worship. The rules for such things were not relevant in the west because the west didn't really have to deal with a wide spread iconoclasm crisis

So what, they had a few not shitty peices of art?

Looks like Spurdo :DDD

Like
says realistic sculpture was considered a bit old hat, at least until around the 8th century, I don't know much about Byzantine art after that but I imagine it might've been the same.

Later Roman and Byzantine art prized exaggerated features and symbolism, realism just wasn't important to them anymore, and as other people have mentioned realistic depictions were relegated to things like plates or charms.

Please, go on.

Are we supposed to prefer the one on the left or something? Much prefer the Irish depiction.

>brainlet
>lol i can't see it therefore it isn't there

what anime is the one on the right from?

Because ancient europeans were up here, and post hebrew mythology europeans were down here

It's actually really interesting seeing the quality of art go down so much. The barbarian invasions and collapse of the western empire seems to have had a huge impact on the east even though it survived.

Only that's totally wrong and Roman art started to get more stylised centuries before the west fell. The two art styles coexisted even.

I thought it was the decline of quality artists, as well as the christianization of Europe.

>centuries before the west fell
One or two centuries? Yes the decline was long coming, and the "coexistion" only represents the transition.

>The Chad Imperator
>The Virgin Basileus

>people were making hyperstylised sculptures in the third century
>people were still making realistic sculpture in the eighth century
>this is somehow a transitional period
user please read a book about late Roman art history

>I thought it was the decline of quality artists, as well as the christianization of Europe
No that's stupid Gibbonian garbage

>Byzantine art was sh-

Why does the later roman empire trigger autist so much?

Interesting. Thank you.