Spring Dawn in The Han Palace and The School of Athens
Qiu Ying’s Spring Dawn in The Han Palace and Raphael’s The School of Athens are excellent examples of paintings closely connected to a specific historical era. Spring Dawn In The Han Palace, created by Qui Ying in approximately 1517, represents various activities in a Han dynasty palace on a spring morning. The composition is supported by unique gong bi brushwork and a vivid color palette. The lavish palace scenes are punctuated by trees and decorative rocks, creating marvelous scenery similar to that of immortal realms. Overall, the painting’s environment and details refer to the Han dynasty and the activities of its members, depicting the routine practices of the 16th-century Chinese royalty.
Raphael’s The School of Athens illustrates another historical period of the ancient era. Written between 1509 and 1511, this painting presents the gathering of the scientific minds in Ancient Greece. In Raphael’s work, the two most important figures are positioned at the vanishing point to draw the viewers’ attention toward them (Alexander-Skipnes 163). Raphael uses linear perspective for the purpose of a realistic scene and to promote the importance of Plato and Aristotle, whose opposing philosophies the fresco represents. The brushwork is strong and pure, with beautiful yet elegant colors. Altogether, this work depicts the schooling environment of Athens and the most distinguished scholars of that time.
The primary similarity between these paintings is that both artworks are deeply linked to a particular historical period. While Spring Dawn in The Han Palace represents the activities of Ancient China, The School of Athens allows an insight into the environment of Ancient Greece. Another resemblant feature is the use of linear perspective, which is included in both works to make the scenes more realistic. However, the depiction of certain historical periods is also a vital distinction, as each era has its own distinguishing aspects. Furthermore, Qiu Ying’s painting illustrates the activities of Chinese royalty, while Raphael’s art portrays the educational activities of renowned Greek scholars. From this perspective, each painting represents a unique period of time in history, which connects them to each other based on the subject chosen for the artwork.
Heart of the Andes and Citlaltepetl
Heart of the Andes and Citlaltepetl are two paintings that focus on the beauty of nature. Heart of the Andes by Frederic Church, created in 1859, reflects not only the artist’s fascination with the environment but also the era’s obsession with the natural world. The painting depicts a romantic vision of a South American landscape, inspired by the artist’s trip to Ecuador. During that time, the desire to explore natural landscapes and travel has risen tremendously, and Church represents this trend in his artwork, creating an idyllic vision of nature.
Similarly, Citlaltepetl, created by Jose María Velasco in 1879, is also a depiction of a natural landscape. Citlaltepetl showcases Velasco’s fascination with the vast natural richness and diversity of Mexico. However, this work also refers to the early industrialization that happened in Mexico during the author’s lifetime. The imminent future, symbolized by the train in the right-hand corner, contrasts the vivid colors of nature, moving toward the viewer and symbolizing the rapid industrialization.
In both of the discussed artworks, nature is seen as a vital part of people’s lives. Following the artistic tendencies of that time, both Church and Velasco portray the beauty of nature and refer to its importance for humankind. Thus, these paintings have a nostalgic, sentimental tone and present the South American landscape like the last glimpse of an earthly Eden. Nevertheless, the locations of the presented landscapes differ significantly, as Church illustrates the Andes and Velasco paints the environment of Mexico. Furthermore, while Church captures the Andes’ landscape, Velasco also refers more openly to industrialization, depicting a train in the background. Therefore, even though both works seem to be linked to the same topic, Velasco’s portrayal is more directed towards the effects of industrialization on nature.
Wire Wheel and Couple, Harlem
Paul Strand’s Wire Wheel and James Van Der Zee’s Couple, Harlem, demonstrate the advancements in machine technologies, the quintessential symbols of modern life in the 1900s. Strand’s work, created in 1920, after World War I, demonstrates a part of a car. Although it might seem that it is simply a picture of a wheel, in fact, this work depicts the technological progress of the 1900s and the rapid growth of cars’ popularity.
Van Der Zee’s work, which was made around 1932, uses a broader landscape. In this photo, Van Der Zee depicts the prosperity of a couple residing a Harlem, wearing raccoon fur coats and posing in front of a new Cadillac. A row of Harlem brownstones can be seen in the background, creating a contrast between the couple’s wealth and the location’s poverty. The lustrous paint and gleaming chrome of this convertible exemplify the couple’s wealth and security, rarities in the United States during the Great Depression.
Overall, the presence of transportation vehicles and the color palettes of the two works are the primary similarities. Both photos illustrate the machines of the 1900s and use the black-and-white pallette to demonstrate the prominent symbols of modern life at that time. However, while Strand only portrays the technological side, Van der Zee also portrays the wealthy individuals of Harlem from that period. Therefore, in contrast with Strand, Van der Zee attempts to demonstrate the luxurious side of the 1900s life, a rare sight during the Great Depression.
Work Cited
Alexander-Skipnes, Ingrid. “Mathematical Imagination in Raphael’s School of Athens.” Visual Culture and Mathematics in the Early Modern Period. Routledge, 2017, pp. 160-186.