The Enlightenment

            The public sphere is defined in the Enlightenment reading as, “an arena of discussion and debate not affiliated with the government or any other form of authority. Gatherings were designed to be egalitarian discussions where minds from all social strata could come together and talk equally together about scientific, literary, political and academic topics”.  I feel that the public sphere became an essential part of society during the age of Enlightenment.  Before this age, people were suppressed and if they were out spoken or shared a different opinion, they were driven out or killed.  Take Galileo for example.  During the Renaissance, the Catholic Church had a lot of power and they controlled what people learned.  When Galileo tried to use Copernicans book to prove to the church that the universe was centered around the sun the book was banned for approximately 200 years.  The church also condemned Galileo for his scientific research and did not revoke that condemnation until 1992.  Before the age of Enlightenment, people were not encouraged to learn for themselves and have an opinion.  As the church lost their power and learning became available to all men, the world became more accepting of new opinions.  The public sphere that developed during the enlightenment became a very important part of society and it continues to be important today. 

            In today’s society we do not see as many physical gatherings in the public sphere, but we do have them.  One example of a public sphere could be a book club because people gather to discuss their opinions on literature that they have all read.  As a result of technology, most of our society’s public sphere takes place on the internet.  I would say chat rooms, social media sites and blogs are all part of our sphere today.  People share their thoughts in all of those settings and people can comment them and share their personal view as well.  On the internet there is no authority present and since it is not face to face conversation people are not afraid to share their true opinions. Online people debate and discuss any matter they choose.  In today’s society, people love that they have the freedom of speech and they will say whatever they want to say when they want to say it.  With freedom of speech being such a huge part of our society, I feel that having a public sphere today means that our society as a whole is educated.  I am aware that not everyone is educated and they do not share information based opinions but I do believe that our society today is more educated than it has ever been.  People have the desire to engage in intellectual conversations and debates.  Sharing opinions shows that people care about that topic.  Having a public sphere is a good thing for society because it allows people to communicate and express themselves freely.

Baroque or Renaissance?

                I feel like our society is definitely more Baroque than Renaissance.  I believe that the Renaissance was a purer time in the history of the world.  During that time people were just beginning to learn for themselves. Up to this point, the church controlled everything so in a sense they controlled how people thought.  Look at the art forms of that day and take a look at the Sistine Chapel celling.  It is beautiful but it is so pure at true.  The art during the Renaissance was so realistic and it focused on man and the beauty man contained.  The statues were so life-like and when people did things differently they were shunned.  Take Galileo for instance, he discovered that the universe rotated around the sun and the Catholic Church condemned him for saying that until 1992! People today have different views and opinions and we just deal with it and let them think what they want to think. 

                My first thought in comparing our society to being more baroque, is that in class, you said artist coined the term baroque to refer to art as grotesque and distorted.  Some art that is made today is focused on pure beauty but a lot of today’s art screams individualism.  During the Renaissance time period, individualism was looked down upon and people were unlearned so they were more close minded.  Today, people are more educated than they ever have been and so many people are tolerant and accepting of others and their opinions.  In my opinion the spread of different cultures has also had an impact on people accepting new and different things.  Back in the day travel occurred but it was slower and mainly for business and today we can fly almost anywhere for fun.  People move to different countries and learn about all kinds of cultures.  This has influenced our society because we constantly interact with different types of people and during the renaissance it was less common.

                  I also feel that many of the art forms today are degrading.  There are many types of art that focus on nude subjects and because of the way our society has developed the pleasure found in these art forms is sexual pleasure not pleasure in the natural beauty of man.  Our society is more baroque today because of the high level of individualism in art and because of how open we are to new things.

The Renaissance

            I chose to respond to question one.  The two statues are different but they are telling different parts of the same story.  Michelangelo’s David is very humanistic.  He resembles what the perfect man would look like. He is tall, broad and muscular which makes him appear perfect.  David also has a strong stance and this makes him look courageous and ready to fight.  This David, has his sling shot in his hand and over his shoulder and it is hard to notice when you first see the statue.  The look on David’s face is one of thought and concentration.  His brow is furrowed and the audience can see that he is in deep thought trying to figure out how to defeat Goliath.  It may even express concern that he may not succeed.  I agree with the statement that Michelangelo’s David is Apollonian classicism. Based on the observations I have previously stated, he fits this description.  I like the fact that the two statues represent different parts of the story, which makes their expressions and attitudes easier to understand.  

            Donatello’s David is clearly passionate individualism. This David’s pose comes across as cocky as he leans into the sword of Goliath.  He does not have the same masculinity as Michelangelo’s David because he is not as muscular and the shape of his form is almost feminine.  The long hair and the hat aid in the feminine look. Aside from the shape of his body the audience sees that underneath David’s left foot is the head of Goliath, which helps explain his cocky stance.  David, who is an untrained farm boy, has just faced the greatest Palestinian warrior.  David shot him with a sling shot and then used Goliath’s sword to cut off his head.  The Palestinian army agreed to stop fighting with the Israelites if their greatest warrior was defeated.  In this instance, David has a right to be cocky.  He can be prideful because he just saved his nation by using whit, not strength and skill.  Understanding the background of Donatello's statue helped me to see why he created David the way he did.  His attitude is appropriate for what he has just accomplished and he deserves glory for what he has done. 

            Although both of the statues are very different, they express the world view of the renaissance.  The statues portray unique emotions and ideas to the viewer but they both resemble man.  Humanism is expressed through both renditions of David.  During the renaissance, the focus shifted from a negative view on human kind to a positive outlook.  This reason can explain why artists of this time period spent so much time re-creating art that was centered on man.  Creativity came into play because man had no bounds and near the end of the renaissance artists realized that art had no limits and they could create whatever they wanted to create.