Personal Styles in Early Cycladic Sculpture by Pat Getz-Gentle

Author:Pat Getz-Gentle [Pat Getz-Gentle]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: University of Wisconsin Press

THE BERLIN SCULPTOR (PLS. 88–90; CHECKLIST PP. 169, 186)

When I wrote Sculptors, I was able to identify only two well-preserved works attributable to an obviously advanced stage of the career of the Berlin Sculptor, a carver of Dokathismata variety figures (pls. 88–89c, d).209 Not long after, while preparing the catalogue entries for the exhibition “Early Cycladic Art in North American Collections,” it occurred to me that two works known to me for many years must also be from his hand, but from an earlier period of his development. These images, one of which is illustrated here (a), are so similar to each other as to leave no doubt that they were made by one person, and yet they are so different from the two images already ascribed to the Berlin Sculptor that, on first inspection, the reader would be quite justified in viewing my claim with strong skepticism.

Putting these allegedly earlier works aside for the time being, I would like to introduce a figure that came to my attention only recently (b). This piece is a most welcome addition to the previously identified works, with which it shares a number of characteristics, some of them highly unusual and, taken together, unique to this sculptor. One might note in particular the chin, differentiated from the neck by little more than a groove; the broad, sloping shoulders, reminiscent of the Goulandris and Ashmolean Sculptors, but with the difference that their outline forms an elegant, continuous curve with the neck; the low-slung, gracefully curving neckline; elbows that stand out well away from the indented waist; hands that widen subtly to accommodate the correct number of precisely incised fingers, with the right hand slightly dropped to accentuate the swell of the abdomen; the large pubic triangle, its apex bisected by the leg-cleft; thighs that taper dramatically from the broad hips to narrow knees; and long calves that swell in profile and end with ankle grooves oriented low on the heels (see profiles). On the rear, one might note the way the upper arms are set in a lower plane from the back, and the continuous spine, which begins well above the imaginary apex formed by the oblique grooves defining the neckline.

Nearly identical in length to c, and slightly less than two-thirds the length of the largest work (d), the new figure was, I believe, the first of the three to be carved. With a maximum width that is a third of the length, it is considerably broader proportionally than either c or d, which are closely similar to each other in that respect, having a width/length ratio of about 1 to 4. The new figure is also slightly thicker than either of the other works, and although executed with care and skill, it lacks the refinement seen in the subtler transitions, especially through the lower body, and in the greater elongation of c and d. Yet the basic style is unmistakably the same. One need only compare the detailed views of the torsos of the three works in plate 90 to appreciate how uncannily similar they are to each other.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.