During the late eighteenth century, significant changes in the arts promulgated the development of, what has since become known, as the period of a neoclassicism. The period has become such an important part of art and architectural history that any examination of these areas must include an overview of neoclassicism and its effect on the interiors of the day. With the realization that the neoclassicist movement had such a profound impact on the development of art and architecture, there is a clear impetus to examine how changes during this time period impacted these specific areas. To this end, this investigation considers the neoclassical period in general and focuses on the specific changes that it brought to the art and architecture of the eighteenth century.The Neoclassical Movement.
Before a clear understanding of how neoclassicism impacted the interiors of the day a clear understanding of how the movement is classified in general terms is first warranted. Saisselin (1991) in his examination of the neoclassical period makes the following observations: "The term neoclassicism awakens in the mind certain images, and words which correspond to them, virtue, civic and moral values, heroic gestures, quiet grandeur and noble simplicity, as well as certain works of art representing noble Romans and ancient Greeks" (p. 14). Saisselin goes on to argue that "both the images and words [of neoclassicism] are somehow connected in art histories with the rise of the bourgeoisie, the liberal aristocracy, and the French Revolution"
[...] As such, a work such as David's Death of Socrates is not about the unique style of the Greek era. Instead, the painting is about the universal experience of death and its implications for the integrity of the individual. When placed in this perspective, it is evident that the neoclassical period, which took place in the late eighteenth century was truly unique when compared with the antecedent classical era. While most laymen would argue that the neoclassical era was simply a revitalization of the classical styles of the Greek and Roman dynasties, the reality is that the work produced in the neoclassical period has a complex multilayered meaning that could not have been conceptualized when classical art and architecture were developed. [...]
[...] Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharp. This text considers the evolution of art history and the underlying philosophies that facilitated the development of these movements. In this text the author attempts to capture the true essence of how various changes occurred in each movement. In addition the text considers how one period evolved into the next. Pellas, G. (1963). Art, Artists and Society: Origins of a Modern Dilemma: Painting in England and France 1750-1850. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. In this text, the author provides a broad overview of the impact of society on the development of art. [...]
[...] The art works to be displayed inside included sculpture and painting, so the building was divided into two zones, with a central Pantheon-like rotunda to house the sculpture, and surrounding galleries for the paintings (p. 423-24). Figure 2 in Appendix B provides an overview of the floor plan for the interior of the Altes Museum. Looking down on the floor plan the importance of the Greek stoa in dividing the interior of the building is well illustrated. Roth notes that in both the Glyptothek and the Altes Museum, Greek details were used by the architects in a limited fashion. [...]
[...] 12). While the basic generalizations that Pelles provides with respect to the artwork created during the neoclassical period provide a basic overview of this movement, Pelles does make more specific observations with respect to the works that were created under the neoclassical umbrella. For instance, Pelles makes the observation that, Neoclassicists thought to clarify and ennoble their works by means of simple forms and compositions, which they often associated with primitive and therefore higher phases of civilization, going back from the Romans to the Greeks” (p. [...]
[...] While the specific context of the art produced during the neoclassical period has been the focus of some author's examinations of the period, other scholars have examined the development of neoclassicism from the standpoint of the meaning that the work conveyed. For instance, Josephson (1996) makes the following observations when it comes to the development of neoclassical art: neoclassical style used a deep Renaissance space into which they put highly idealized figures tightly constrained by a concise system of stylistic conventions. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
