Comparing Nude Women of Art from different eras

It is surprising how different female body sculptures from different ancient civilizations are. The diverse forms of human body also embody many different functions and meanings. In art, naked figures reflect a very complex set of formal ideals, philosophical concerns, and cultural traditions. In this essay I would like to compare two sculptures of nude women. The first one is the Venus of Willendorf which was built in Paleolithic Period. Another is called the Venus of Milo carved in ancient Greece. The female body of the Venus of Willendorf depicts enlarged breasts, buttocks and genital, which represents fertility, while the body of Venus of Milo, on the other hand, demonstrates beauty and perfect proportions. Despite the difference characteristics and styles between them, they both represent the different view of the perfect female form.

The most widely known female figurine, the Venus of Willendorf, with only 11cm in height, is possibly the smallest female nude sculpture we know. It is one of the most obese representations of the Paleolithic statuary. The Venus of Willendorf can be dated back to approximately the Paleolithic period, around 28,000 to 25,000 BCE. According to some analysis, it was obvious that it had once been “painted with red ochre”, a symbolic substance commonly found in connection with burials and grave goods from the same time period. It was made of Oolitic limestone. Her thighs are also large and pressed together down on the knees. The thin arms rest on the breasts, legs that end in knobs below the knee and the feet appear to be broken off. Further, the sculpture has no facial features - the head being almost completely covered by a braided pattern. There is a theory that the figurine's hair is braided in seven concentric circles, seven in later times being regarded as a magic number used to bring about good luck. At a time when aesthetic ideas have not yet fully developed, the artists put more emphasis on nature worship, religions, and consciousness. With the aesthetic standard of beauty nowadays, the public would not consider the plumped body shape as attractive. Instead of emphasis on physical beauty and dynamic details of the character of the limbs, the artists from the Paleolithic exaggerated the performance of female secondary sexual characteristics in the shape of art. Beautiful of this statue, lies not in perfection but in its simplicity and flaws. Her round and curvaceous figure is a celebration of health and fertility which in the Paleolithic time were both very essential for survival and power.

The reason why they formed such aesthetic standard is that during the Paleolithic period, the biggest issue people faced was to find food and fight against wild animals. The hypertrophy of female genitals represents worship of high productivity, which can satisfy the needs of prosperity. The prominence of genitals became the sign of richness to the ancient ancestors. Women were recognized as the life-givers and sustainers. From this point, we can see that the art of nude women is actually close to people’s beliefs. It is the ideal form of women body during Paleolithic period.

On the other hand, the artists of Greek did the reverse of what Paleolithic people did. They created a perfect form of human body. Greece was the birthplace of Western classical art. The achievements of architecture and sculpture during the classical period were extraordinary. Sculpture originated from the needs of production of decorative architecture as a tribute to the power of religion, or to pleasure of rulers. The ancient Greek sculptures preferred to depicting the expression of God rather than human. In an atmosphere of freedom and democracy, the Greek artists pursued the perfect and elegant form of body instead of showing real people’s character or appearance. They could depict nudity freely. In the opinion of artists, naked body represents nature. They endowed their understanding of life to build the sculpture of Ancient Greek gods, showing the ideal form of human. Greek artists expressed their reverence to gods, desire of freedom, and love of nature by carving sculptures of perfect human body. Venus of Milo is a great example of Greek art. It is one of the most important pieces of work of the Greek era.

The Venus of Milo, also known as Aphrodite of Milos, was carved by Alexandros of Antioch-on-the-Meander in Greece, sometime between 130 and 100 BC, approximately 27,850 years later than Venus of Willendorf. In contrast with the small hand-sized Venus of Willendorf, this statue is larger than most real women, standing approximately 6’7” high. This life size statue is almost perfectly sculpted from marble. The sculpture shows a standing woman, half clothes torn off, exposing her arms and head tilted slightly to the right. Her left leg is bending. Her waist is twisted, shoulder tilting, depicting the movement of the whole body. Her upper bare body has fleshy details; the lower body is wrapped in cloth, showing bending of her knees. Even though Venus of milo is much slimmer than the Venus of Willidorf, we can still tell our ancestors’ obsession with body fat from the fleshy details. When present in the right proportions in the female form, it has been a symbol of femininity, sensuality and importantly fertility. The aesthetic standard of Greece is much closer to the standard nowadays. If one follows the S curve of her body, the sensuality of her carelessly held drapery and the feminine quality of her back, one can still see that beauty, even it is from thousands of years ago. While, the emotionless look upon her face that no one can really interpret. It is not the face of human being but the expression of goddess. Although influenced by elements taken from High Classical Greek Sculpture - the aloofness and impassivity of the head, we can still see Venus de Milo makes use of creative innovations from the 3rd-1st century BCE, known as Hellenism. Both the slight turn of the body from the hips to the shoulder, resulting in a fascinating S-shaped pose, and the contrast between the smooth nude flesh of the torso and the ruffled texture of the drapery covering the legs represent the characteristics of Hellenic period. The woman in sculpture misses arms causes much debate on what this statue indicates. “Some broken pieces (now lost) found with it indicated that the figure was holding out an apple in its right hand. Another theory is that Aphrodite was admiring herself in the highly polished shield of the war god Ares, an image that was popular in the 2nd century BCE.

The woman’s name was Aphrodite, a Greek goddess. She was considered as life-giving, proud, and seductive. Unlike the carving of the Venus of Willendorf, there is nothing abstract or nonrepresentational about this piece, as she is sculpted exquisitely mirroring the human form in the most perfect proportions, making this piece represented the natural world. The forms are not merely copied from nature, however, but are exalted in the imitation. “This is the face and body of every woman, and yet of no woman. It is every-where in the world, yet lifted above life with an element of idealism.” said the author of The Meaning and Function of Sculpture.

Both Willendorf and Milo are related to the sex and fertility and Goddess of Love. They both represent Women of importance and beauty in their time. As a result of that, they were both likely meant to please the eye.
Venus of Willendorf embodies biological needs. The Paleolithic people would use these small sculptures to communicate between groups of hunters and gatherers. The small hand-held size allows people to carry it around easily. According to Marilyn Stokstad, an author of Art History (Fourth Edition), the female statues may have been among several signature objects that signaled whether a group was friendly and acceptable for interaction and, probably, for mating. Although this sculpture is referred to as "Venus" usually associated with Aphrodite, "goddess of love, it is not intentionally associated with god. Observing Paleolithic nude sculpture, for example, the Venus of Willendorf, the Venus of Dolni Vestonice and the Venus of Kostienki, we can see that they all have some common characteristics, such as enlarged breast carved into a rounded whole, enlarged buttocks shape, and colors to highlight the female genital parts. From so many of nude female sculptures, it can be seen that people worshiped women's these body parts in the early age. Consequently they might indicate a stage of matriarchal society in human history. With the development of technology and economy, prehistoric people entered an age when people slowly changed to communal marriage and children knew only who their mothers were without any idea of their fathers. Women were respected by the clan members as the leaders.

On the other hand, the functional purpose Of Venus of Milo is to depict Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love. Although there are some feminists who argue that her original purpose was for men to objectify, and that her fame is only a celebration of this objectification. I hold the opinion that the artists who depicted the goddesses used the women of the time to model the goddesses. The behaviors of the goddesses, in this case, Aphrodite, are believed to represent the behaviors of women of ancient Greece. Women sculptures appeared in art in the same positions with the approximately same size with men (for example, Doryphoros is 6 feet 11 inches tall), which suggests that Greeks were more likely to be equalitarian society.

To sum up, Venus of Willendorf is an abstract sculpture, representing the symbol of fertility, while Venus of Milo shows the perfect proportion of human body. Although they are distinct in the functions they perform and the aspects of society they address, both pieces depict women who are seen to be ideal in different time periods.

Bibliography
Jennett, Karen Diane. Female Figurines of the Upper Paleolithic. San Marcos, Texas. 2008
Sorabella, Jean. The Nude in Western Art and its Beginnings in Antiquity. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. N/A..
Clark, Kenneth The Nude: A Study in Ideal Form. New York: Pantheon, 1956.
Christopher L. C. E. Witcombe. The Venus of Willendorf. The Institute for the Promotion of Learning Disorders. N/A.
Janson, H. W. History of Art: A survey of the Major Visual Arts from the Dawn of History to Present Day. New York: Harry N. Abrams Incorporated,1977.
Witcombe CL. The Venus of Willendorf. [Last accessed in 2011 Oct]
Author N/A, The Meaning And Function Of Sculpture; available from http://art.yodelout.com/the-meaning-and-function-of-sculpture/; Internet; accessed 17 June 2004.