Comparing Early Human Art and Modern Art
While early human art was created under different circumstances to modern art, early human art was often just as abstract as more modern art found in museums because both were created as vehicles to portray broader ideas, both can oftentimes be aesthetically similar, and both evoke emotional responses from the viewer. These points will be explored through the analysis of various Paleolithic artworks alongside a number of modern artworks. While these works may not share any similarities on a surface level, one needs only look just below the surface to see how the work of early humans bear a striking resemblance to the ideas behind more modern artworks.
More specifically, in order of appearance, this paper will look at the cave painting of Lascaux/Chauvet and Barnett Newman, the Venus of Willendorf and the sculptures of Fernando Botero, and the art found in the Cueva de las Manos and the art of Zdzisław Beksiński.
Abstraction
First, early human art was often just as abstract as more modern art found in museums because both were created as vehicles to portray broader ideas. The primary examples that will be used to discuss this point are the cave paintings of Lascaux and Chauvet in comparison to Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue? by American artist Barnett Newman.
In all three pieces, the ideas represented are far larger than what is seen on the surface. One interpretation of the Lascaux and Chauvet cave art, created by Julien d’Huy, tells us that the depictions of the cave art may have actually been a way for early humans to display the relationship between various animals. Deer were friendly toward other animals, bison and aurochs fought, etc. Similarly, it may have served as a guide to show where various animals resided in the ancient world (d’Huy 493–502).
While Who’s Afraid is not a display of the relationships between various fauna, it is a display of the relationship between colors, between paint and the canvas, and between the lack of color in the contemporaneous art at the time. As such, it can be argued that Newman used the piece to display relationships between various objects and ideas in a way that would have been similar to the methods used by early humans.
Aesthetics
Aesthetically, both modern museum pieces and early human art often share values here too. Looking at the Venus of Willendorf and Colombian artist Fernando Botero’s Naked Lady this aesthetic similarity is striking.
Both sculptures feature feminine figures with exaggerated proportions — specifically in reference to body parts relating to fertility. In the case of Venus, we see exaggerated breasts and hips, while in Naked Lady we see large hips while the figure poses in a sensual manner.
Interestingly, it should be noted that the artistic intent of Venus of Willendorf is not known (White). The artistic intent of Naked Lady as well as Botero’s other works are often questioned as well, with some critics debating whether there is any deeper critique or meaning to them at all. Whether or not Botero is influenced by works such as Venus is unknown though.
Emotional Response
Finally, early human art was often just as abstract as more modern art found in museums because both evoke emotional responses from the viewer. Here, the Cueva de las Manos will be compared and contrasted to Polish artist Zdzisław Beksiński’s Untitled, 1985 also known as Obraz KO.
The emotional responses elicited by these two pieces are immediate. On one hand, the Cueva de las Manos evokes a hopeful, human response. It tells us a story of early humans wanting to leave something to be remembered by (Parfit). A legacy, of sorts.
On the other hand, Beksiński’s Untitled immediately fills the viewer with a sense of foreboding and dread. It is difficult to look at, actively encouraging the viewer to avert their eyes lest they have the courage to gaze upon it.
Although both works are on emotionally polar opposites, they both do an effective job of forcing the audience to come to terms with innate human emotions.
It should also be noted that both pieces were also created using iron-based pigments. The Cueva uses iron oxides to produce reds and purples (Wainwright) and Untitled uses Prussian Blue which is produced from a ferrous formulation of cyanide.
Conclusion
Thus, while early human art was created under different circumstances to modern art, early human art was often just as abstract as more modern art found in museums. Regardless of the circumstances that led to the creation of the art, it is the act of creation in and of itself that connects these two vastly different eras together. Present in both is the drive to create and to leave a legacy to withstand the test of time.
There was no way for the cave-dwellers of the Paleolithic era to know that their art would still exist into modern day, just as there is no way for today’s artist to know if their art will still exist in the centuries to come.
In both cases, the purpose of the art is to relate a broader idea or emotion into a simpler, physical medium. This allows the audience, whether intended or otherwise, to grapple with the concepts presented therein. Themes of hopefulness, legacy, self-image, aesthetics, and the world around us.
One would be remiss to view modern art as brilliant works while writing off the art of early humans as crude or somehow lesser. As such, the opposite is also true. Because of this, both eras are equally important in analyzing the psychology of humanity and how it values aesthetics and art within society.
While the analysis of each piece on its own is possible, one misses out on the greater picture. Missing the forest for the trees, so to speak.
The writer Raymond Williams summarizes this best in his work Marxism and Literature. Therein, he argues that it is inherently impossible to excise a work from a broader “continuum of art.” By doing so, one removes broader meaning and excludes other works from adding to the meaning. (Williams) This creates a sort of manipulated meaning that appeals to one’s own intention instead of showing the true meaning of art as it relates to itself and the history surrounding it.
Taking all of this into consideration, the art created by early humans is just as important as art seen as “museum art.” Early human art deals with many of the same themes and concepts that art continues to deal with in modernity.
Works Cited
Julien d’Huy (2011). “La distribution des animaux à Lascaux reflèterait leur distribution naturelle”, Bulletin de la Société Historique et Archéologique du Périgord CXXXVIII, 493–502
White, R. The Women of Brassempouy: A Century of Research and Interpretation. J Archaeol Method Theory 13, 250–303 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-006-9023-z
Parfit, Michael (December 2000). “Hunt for the First Americans”. National Geographic. Vol. 198 no. 6. National Geographic Society. p. 40.
Wainwright, Ian & Helwig, Kate & Rolandi, Diana & Gradin, Carlos & Podestá, María & Onetto, María & Aschero, Carlos. (2002). Rock paintings conservation and pigment analysis at Cueva de las Manos and Cerro de los Indios, Santa Cruz (Patagonia), Argentina.
Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature (Oxford Univ. Press, 1977), 155. ISBN 9780198760610
