I find it interesting that there is so much ado stemming from a drawing of the human figure from two perspectives. I do not see the drawing as a relation of man to nature, or providing an analogy between the symmetry of man and the symmetry of the universe. Much like the proposition that the square cannot have the same center as the circle in the picture, the universe has far more to offer than we currently comprehend and cannot be condensed into a experiment in the proportionality of the human body. If, as proposed in class, all of existence is solely based on the magnetic interactions between protons and neutrons and there is no creativity, no ability to think beyond what we will think no matter our desire to think otherwise, then da Vinci's efforts to correlate the universe to man are nothing more than the collision of protons and neutrons forcing him to think in such a way, rather than a light directed as exposing the mystery of the universe.
I think that saying that the workings of the human body are analogous to the the workings of the universe assigns too much importance to humans. Also, the Vitruvian Man is supposed to represent a man with "perfect" proportions; however, most people are at least slightly off from this. Because of this, I think that using it as the representative of men is a somewhat dubious choice. Looking at proportions is very important in photography though. This can help make your images better/more interesting. This is demonstrated (somewhat) by the rule of thirds which is a rule of thumb that is often used when framing photographs.
I disagree- humans have been created by nature and therefore are indeed analagous to the workings of the universe. Through natural selection, the structures we have now have evolved to create the most sustainable creatures currently present.
I do, however, agree with Zach's comment that if this is supposed to be the perfect man we are all slightly off from these proportions. What I think we can take from this is that if we are all imperfect there really is no "perfect", making our imperfections all perfections if that makes any sense.
First off, I would like to applaud Linda for using Wikipedia to get a link. Many professors don't like it but it really is a convenient source of usually accurate information!
I think the most important take away from the Vitruvian Man is that he represents the connection between art and science. When you look at him and his proportions, he is symbolic of the link between the two. As Maz always tells us in class, a lot of art has its base in physics or math. Math is also the base for science a lot of the time. This connection between the two disciplines is often overlooked because art and science seem so different on the surface.
Grace, I do not understand why you think Miss Linda using Wikipedia as a source is an incredulous achievement. Many of my professors have worked on Wikipedia independently and cite that it is just as credible as a math or science journal.
The Virtuvian Man completely reminds me of the Renaissance Man, as in the man who is balanced (in this case in the fields of art and science). I would like someone to comment directly to this thought. I am interested in the responses I will receive.
Wow, after going back and reading the article again, I completely did not make the connection, especially considering that the artist was Leonardo DaVinci
DaVinci was one of the artists I studied heavily in high school. The backstory behind the Vitruvian Man, or any of DaVinci's anatomical drawings, interested me. DaVinci had dissected hundreds cadavers for the sake of getting his drawings anatomically correct, as well as being incredibly detailed..
I find it interesting that there is so much ado stemming from a drawing of the human figure from two perspectives. I do not see the drawing as a relation of man to nature, or providing an analogy between the symmetry of man and the symmetry of the universe. Much like the proposition that the square cannot have the same center as the circle in the picture, the universe has far more to offer than we currently comprehend and cannot be condensed into a experiment in the proportionality of the human body. If, as proposed in class, all of existence is solely based on the magnetic interactions between protons and neutrons and there is no creativity, no ability to think beyond what we will think no matter our desire to think otherwise, then da Vinci's efforts to correlate the universe to man are nothing more than the collision of protons and neutrons forcing him to think in such a way, rather than a light directed as exposing the mystery of the universe.
ReplyDeleteI think that saying that the workings of the human body are analogous to the the workings of the universe assigns too much importance to humans. Also, the Vitruvian Man is supposed to represent a man with "perfect" proportions; however, most people are at least slightly off from this. Because of this, I think that using it as the representative of men is a somewhat dubious choice. Looking at proportions is very important in photography though. This can help make your images better/more interesting. This is demonstrated (somewhat) by the rule of thirds which is a rule of thumb that is often used when framing photographs.
ReplyDeleteI disagree- humans have been created by nature and therefore are indeed analagous to the workings of the universe. Through natural selection, the structures we have now have evolved to create the most sustainable creatures currently present.
DeleteI do, however, agree with Zach's comment that if this is supposed to be the perfect man we are all slightly off from these proportions. What I think we can take from this is that if we are all imperfect there really is no "perfect", making our imperfections all perfections if that makes any sense.
First off, I would like to applaud Linda for using Wikipedia to get a link. Many professors don't like it but it really is a convenient source of usually accurate information!
ReplyDeleteI think the most important take away from the Vitruvian Man is that he represents the connection between art and science. When you look at him and his proportions, he is symbolic of the link between the two. As Maz always tells us in class, a lot of art has its base in physics or math. Math is also the base for science a lot of the time. This connection between the two disciplines is often overlooked because art and science seem so different on the surface.
Grace, I do not understand why you think Miss Linda using Wikipedia as a source is an incredulous achievement. Many of my professors have worked on Wikipedia independently and cite that it is just as credible as a math or science journal.
ReplyDeleteThe Virtuvian Man completely reminds me of the Renaissance Man, as in the man who is balanced (in this case in the fields of art and science). I would like someone to comment directly to this thought. I am interested in the responses I will receive.
it is the same dude
DeleteWow, after going back and reading the article again, I completely did not make the connection, especially considering that the artist was Leonardo DaVinci
DeleteDaVinci was one of the artists I studied heavily in high school. The backstory behind the Vitruvian Man, or any of DaVinci's anatomical drawings, interested me. DaVinci had dissected hundreds cadavers for the sake of getting his drawings anatomically correct, as well as being incredibly detailed..
ReplyDelete