'The Aristodikos is so convincingly realistic and looks so much like a living man...' [WOODFORD]. How far do you agree with Woodford's opinion?

In order for the question to be answered, it must be approached in a specific mode. First of all, it is important to annotating that a technical and fair answer to the question would allow the slipway in which Woodford is right and the ways in which she is wrong. Also, the way in which the subject of her story must be judged is by analyse it to subject fields of the same period in order to work out its position among statues of its while. We must recollect to what extent her arguing is true and under what circumstances the tilt exists. As mentioned before, a skinny argument would include the rights and wrongs of the statement therefore we will stolon look at the ways in which the statement is true. The archaic period was a time when the main inspiration for Greek sculpture came from the Egyptians, therefore some similarities can be seen when analyse Greek to Egyptian. Similarities can be seen in the way accordance is used which is the one of the formation human faces of the Archaic style. A good example of this is shown in the spic York Kouros on which a proficiency of mirror lines was used to produce perfect symmetry. This very technique which aims for perfection is what makes the forward-looking York Kouros unreal, as the humankind body is rich of imperfections.

The sculptor of the Aristodikos has taken this into grievance and his awareness of proportions in the human body is much much refined than that of the creator of the New York Kouros. So in this aspect the Aristodikos has great naturalistic advancements all over its contemporary counterparts. The New Yor k Kouros has another aspect making it unreal! istic; there is no impression given of soft flesh. Although the rear of the statue... If you want to reduce a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper