[1109×1490] The Evolution of Ancient Greek Statues

I hate this so much. It’s called teleology. And in art history it appears—like this post—as the assumption that the outcome of artistic endeavor is a natural progression toward something we recognize today as great. So the 1st century sculpture is artistically more “valuable” than the sculpture from the 7th century BCE. In reality, so much goes into aesthetic changes over time. Art is a representation, and how the artist (or sculpture, in this case) understands the achievement they pursue is completely tied to their time period and their own personal perspectives on the world and their work in relation to that world. There is no “natural evolution” in art. There is only art. And art must be judged by tastes, sentiments, and ideas held by artist in relation to the critic’s own values and ideas about artistic merit, whatever time period they are from. It’s fine to hate the first image while loving the final one from this post. Just don’t tell me that the final image is “better” because it’s more realistic. Realism is an aesthetic we value in our modern world, so of course many people nowadays will like it. That doesn’t make it better art.