Why weren't people good at art until the Renaissance?

What's wrong with pre-Renaissance art?

Because of middle eastern jewish sect called Christianity.

>>1794429
>Christianity
It's called Christendom, ya dweeb.

>>1794436
You mean Christianism.

>>1794283
>>1794429
>>1794436
>>1794438
Kys

File: chi_rho_large.jpg (483KB, 1077x1473px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 1077x1473px

Yeah I know man medieval art sucked lmao

look at this shit lol you cant even tell what its supposed to be

it's not even a photorealistic drawing of a human being haha what the fuck

haha

File: byzantineicon.jpg (385KB, 1100x2127px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1100x2127px

>>1794429

>hurr all christian art is poopy XD

Byzantine Icon from the 6th century

>>1794460

Looks pretty poopy tbqh.

>>1794460
I laughed at the right eye.

Please God don't send me to hell

Hurr durr if a drawing isn't naturalistic it isn't good, hurrr

File: Fayum-34.jpg (270KB, 704x1260px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 704x1260px

>>1794265
People were good at art long before the renaissance. This picture was painted in 3rd century.

See also >>1794460 which was painted by Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire). Maybe it wasn't Christianity which caused bad art, but the fall of Rome. Since the Eastern half never fell, they stayed good at art.

Also, weren't pictures such as the one in OP generally drawn by monks, not talented artists?

>>1794453
Interestingly this has some resemblance to some types of Islamic art, with the use of pattern and abstract designs instead of representing human figures and falling into the trap of them not looking realistic. There is no reality to compare it to so it's impossible to "look bad" the way a poorly drawn representation of a person, animal, etc does. Look up Arabic calligraphy, illuminated copies of the Quran,, girih patterns, etc. and compare it to insular art. It really makes you think!
Compare this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_knot
with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_interlace_patterns

File: insular v islamic.png (2MB, 1126x627px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1126x627px

>>1794503
Left: insular art featuring "Celtic knot" patterns.
Right: Islamic art featuring "girih" knot patterns.
Really makes you think!

>>1794265
Probably, just not exactly how the bible described events. The books attributed to them weren't written by them either

File: h5_13.227.1.jpg (27KB, 298x400px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 298x400px

>>1794265
The answer is christianity. More specifically pre-christian roman artists were masters of realism, and when christianity rose to power most forms of art were outlawed and a thousand years later artists literally had to relearn almost everything from scratch. Not even memeing, that's literally what happened.

This is objectvelly better than most of the renaissence art, though. The focus on technique is what killed art.

>>1794539
This is kind of relegating art to sculpture and painting, christian europe made some amazing architectural art.

>>1794265
art is subjective, They werent bad at art they like this style. Faggot

>>1794539
>when christianity rose to power most forms of art were outlawed
lmao

File: 411f840b94f43d4d52d1d254feccafc6.jpg (41KB, 300x465px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 300x465px

Medieval artists were more concerned with symbolic meaning than technicality, buthey could make realistic art if it was called for.

>>1794500
The right side is Christ as judge, the left side is Christ as redeemer.

Because that's a doodle inserted into a book by someone who was not an artist, just a copyist who got bored.

>>1794589
>sculpture
Medieval artists weren't bad sculptors by any means

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/face/hd_face.htm

File: blank.jpg (39KB, 594x395px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 594x395px

>>1794635
>dude, it's just symbolic lmao
j..just like today's artists... heh....

>>1794635
No. Sculpture has always been easier if you're gunning for realism.

Medieval 2d art was fucked up until the 1400s.

>>1794675
>sculture
>easier


Kys and stay kyssed

File: mosley2.jpg (17KB, 449x299px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 449x299px

>>1794460
BEADY

File: 014.jpg (75KB, 379x470px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 379x470px

>>1794503
>they stayed good at art

>>1794265
It was deliberate, mainly because they worked with what tools they had. The better the tools were, the more they were able to do more intricate styles.

pretty sure renaissance paint was just eggs, oils and dyes, which is phenomenal considering the paintings that were done with them

>>1794265

Because most of what people consider to be "medieval art" are actually book illustrations. Most of them being very tiny amd added as decoration to the text.

Most are also depicting something from the accompanying text, amd showing that was more important than being a photo realistic depictions of life. Thats why you get seige scenes where the soldiers are taller than the castle ways, fighting hand to hand with tiny people on the walls. Showing that the people outside were fighting the people inside, was more important than getting size and scale right.

>>1794539
Negative Ghost Rider.

There is a distinct downgrade in Classical Art starting in the 2nd Century AD. Just compare Trajan's Column with Marcus Aurelius'.

As it turns out, art goes in cycles like anything else.

Technologies regarding painting improved over time

>>1794460
>icons
delete this

Is it not that with the collapse of the roman empire, artists and artisans had less and less patrons who could employ them to create art objects. This would then lead to the trade shrinking, less masters would be able to pass on their knowledge and skills, eventually causing a rather extreme regression in the quality of art that was able to be produced. It came back in the Renaissance because that's when wealthy patrons were once again able to fund it.

>>1795344
that's amazing, what are you talking about???

File: chinese-painting.jpg (292KB, 900x451px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 900x451px

Chinks and Japs were pretty good at art. But they're not white so I guess they don't count, right?

File: Ashtiname of Muhammad.jpg (197KB, 754x872px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 754x872px

>>1794526
Islam also took minarets, prayer-mats and Jesus Christ from Christianity.

>>1794265
I think it's because it's northern european art. England, Germany, France, all these nations were at their infancy and no wonder their art would be sub par.

File: pre-renaissance art.png (153KB, 523x491px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 523x491px

>>1794453
Truly an artistic masterpiece

File: KellsFol032vChristEnthroned.jpg (480KB, 1228x1600px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 1228x1600px

>>1798603
'tis indeed

Because there weren't really 'artists' until then, just craftsmen (and scribes).