Why are late medieval art and iconography so much better than

>>2691051
>They're a worship of God rather than human form
Isn't man made in god's image? Celebration of the human form is a celebration of the divine.

this is the stupidest post ive ever read

File: christ throne of glory.jpg (143KB, 555x757px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 555x757px

>>2691053
Not really, christianity isn't pantheistic. There is/was this thing called humility, where the human beauty, power, and knowledge are not something to be glorified.

File: 36214e55e36dea673326574f5e62e6de.jpg (97KB, 736x832px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 736x832px

>>2691051

File: UGH.png (54KB, 217x183px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 217x183px

why are you all falling for this crappy /pol/ retard bait

File: Workshop_of_Raphael_-_Madonna_of_the_Candelabra_-_Walters_37484.jpg (479KB, 1736x1800px)

479KB, 1736x1800px

Renaissance is the best. I don't see millions of people coming to Europe to look at icon paintings. Yes, it's ICON paintings, not iconography. There's no need to add -ography to make the art sound more learned. Since you're using the word iconography wrong, I'm assuming you're also using the word humanism wrong.

Renaissance actually had rationalization for why they do things. A complete system of an art that extends beyond painting, including other disciplines like philology, history, philosophy, theology, true iconology, mythology, etc. Renaissance art is better because it's for the most part more complete.

Picture is by the divine Raphael.

>>2691051
hahahahaha

>>2691051
This is way too strong for 4chan bro.

>>2691051
>worshiping a jew

>>2691051
>thinking that worshipping the human form instead of God is degenerate
>thinking that all or most art after the late medieval period is sexualized
I know this is bait by the way, good one, made me chuckle.

File: 1447254642424.jpg (38KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 450x450px

>>2691051
>Mary has a shitty face that looks like a mop and is so elongated she could pass as a horse
>hands bonier than an AIDS infected junkie
>baby jesus balding from and early age and having the neck of a body builder while holding some TNT/crayola

yeah mate, this is definitely the pinnacle of art

>>2691051
God made man and man was made in god's image. To study and create beautiful likenesses of man is to study and admire God's work and those who mirror his likeness.

>>2691053
Kek, if only God was real.

>>2691058
>where the human beauty, power, and knowledge are not something to be glorified.

This is what gave us PETA and self hating nu males. Fuck humility, human pride eternity wide

>>2691441
He's not real, but he exists.
Lrn2culturalconstructs

File: christ-the-redeemer.jpg (89KB, 356x599px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 356x599px

>>2691232
But it is graceful, humble, and full of meaning. Icon artist didn't paint to get paid. The pretentiousness of renaissance arts obstructs their meaning.

>>2691458
What gives us PETA and numales is the inability to see beyond materials.

>>2691441

god is as much real as you are. you knew that humans aren't real? we are just some biological mechanisms with a certain strange purpose. our personality is some kind of interface built on top of primitive biological needs. nothing exists, it's just our perception. we can not exist separately, because we are not supposed to function that way, we need each other to become something more that just one person. we are society, that lives as long as the humanity is alive, though this is something abstract that's not so easily understood by one. it's easier to say that this shit doesn't exist than accept something more complicated and strange and scary than some fake simplified image of yourself that you created. and you say that god doesn't exist because you don't have a place for him in your image. though your perception is as spoiled and superficial as of someone that believes that god exist.

File: giotto2.jpg (458KB, 1552x2105px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1552x2105px

>>2691051
>>2691081

I agree, renaissance art is much more beautiful, and I don't think there was a fundamental difference in the mindset of the painters.

They all tried their best to make the paintings look as beautiful as possible, because their worship of God was fundamentally the same.
And while the early ones did not have the knowledge to paint with pespective and stuff, they enriched their works with golden sheets and things like that to make them look the best they could.

But I am sure that if they had the tools and the skills, they would have painted more realistically, like the renaissance artists.

This pic is from Giotto, who was the one who started adding depth to the two-dimensional paintings of the time. You can see how he tried. I'm sure if he had the science and the skill he would have painted like the renaissance artists.

And btw, I don't see that much sexual degeneration in renaissance art. Really I start seeing it from later on, when the subject matter of painting stops being religious scenes and shifts to everyday stuff. Especially around the period of the industrial revolution.

>>2691051
Nigga you retarded? That baby is literally a tiny man. They didn't understand human proportions at this time, It's not the best.

File: 9fd78f526287d122134cf6ccfaf4809b.jpg (485KB, 736x1101px) Image search: [Google]

485KB, 736x1101px

>>2691575
Those comical portrayals of mankind's view of the divine are anything but graceful, in fact the twisted figures are quite ugly and grotesque. Renaissance artists elevate the human form and appreciate the beauty of the world for what it is while actually applying some degree of skill. Iconography is void of both beauty and skill.

File: Raffael_stcatherina.jpg (151KB, 850x1157px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 850x1157px

>>2692003
But that's not Renaissance. The beauty of Renaissance painting in large part comes from its placing of importance in decorum, that the principles of art should suffice. It was an antique vision of perfection where there is no feeling of excess.

>>2691616
There's some eroticism in Renaissance although it's rarely the fleshy eroticism of someone like Rubens. It's a feat that although there are some paintings which display eroticism, the primary effect is not lust, but beauty. I suppose the otherworldly idealism has to do with it, where they are not simply naked figures but rather nudes, as well as the modest countenance.

>>2691575
Praising humanity is the furthest thing from materialism. Humility is not divine. Humility is what is instilled in populations for wholly materialistic control.