The "Venus of Willendorf" is an amazing and fascinating sculpture. I believe that this work of art signifies the importance, respect and influence of women in the Paleolithic Era. It is not a coincidence that many other pieces from that time are similar to the "Venus of Willendorf,” signifying the admiration of this particular corpulent female form. I also do not believe that it is a coincidence that these figurines far outnumber the images of men of that time. Whether this “Venus” was a fertility idol, a representation of an actual woman or a portrayal of an “Earth Mother,” I believe that it signifies the prominence of women of that time.
This “Venus” is not the Venus that many conjure up in our minds when we think of the term. I think of the slender goddess of love and beauty as depicted in other works of art many years later, such as the modest Capitoline Venus, as seen and written about in Witcombe’s article. Men used the name “Venus” in a sarcastic way to describe these early figurines because they believed they were not modest, tasteful or civilized in the male dominated society of their time. The "Venus of Willendorf" is not modest and shows all of her beauty, unashamed. She does not try to cover up anything and actually seems to be flaunting her sexuality with her arms over her breasts not attempting to conceal herself at all, she is proud of her body.
I can understand why some think that the "Venus of Willendorf" was a fertility idol. The detail that went into the creation of the piece, especially the genital area, along with the large breasts and corpulent stomach would seem to indicate sexuality and pro creativity. I know that many believe that this figurine is not pregnant but in fact fat, I do not know if that is the correct interpretation. She is very large, but that could be due to the fact that she is with child and the members of her clan allow her to rest while they hunt and gather for her. It would also be good of the clan as a whole to allow her to have no complications with the pregnancy so that the clan can continue to grow.
If this were an actual representation of a woman of that time, it would demonstrate the women’s considerable importance at that time. As hunters and gatherers it would suggest that she was indeed “catered” to by others. Perhaps she was the leader of their society and was of great importance to the group in this matriarchal period of time.
The "Venus of Willendorf" and other similar figurines of that time could also represent a female deity an Earth Mother or Mother Goddess as Witcombe references. Mother Earth is a term I have heard as long as I can remember. Is it possible that it started with this “Venus”? With the figure being over 20,000 years old, it is doubtful, but possible. But I believe that it is definitely possible that this was a depiction of their Earth Mother and an idol used for worshiping.
I doubt that we will ever find out exactly what the "Venus of Willendorf" signifies or depicts, but isn’t that what art is about, the unknown? We will continue to talk about this indefinitely because of the unknown and beauty of the figurine. Whatever it signifies, I believe that it demonstrates the deep respect and influence, if not power, of the women of that time.
This is a very thoughtful post, Jesse. Along these lines about women in prehistoric society, I wanted to raise one issue. I think it is very likely that women were very prominent in prehistoric times, but we're not quite sure. Even if they weren't prominent back then, a lot of scholars in the 19th century wanted to promote the idea that prehistoric societies were matriarchal.
ReplyDeleteWitcombe discusses how evolution was a popular theory in the 19th century (thanks to Darwin's "Origin of Species" from 1859). Since some 19th century scholars were promoting the idea that a prehistoric society was matriarchal, their theory implied that society had evolved (up until the 19th century) to a more advanced, patriarchal society. In essence, prehistoric society was matriarchal because prehistoric people weren't smart enough to know any better. (Can you see how scholars back then used this discussion of matriarchy to cast the prehistoric period in a bad light?) It's interesting to see how the mindset of "patriarchal history" has affected our interpretation of prehistoric people.
-Prof. Bowen
You brought up an interesting comment with the more women than men depicted in this time frame. I think if we took a survey we would find that quite common until recent times. The feminine form seems to have been the preferred subject in many art forms and artifacts. I think until modern times the fascination was with women being able to grow a human inside them and being able to bring to life another being. And on a more biased point women's bodies sort of rock. I like drawing and painting female bodies and its because they are beautiful to my eye. What if it was for that reason that stone figures are more often female? I sometimes think as humans we try to make things more complicated than they are, sometimes a carving of a plump woman is just that no more no less. One of the other aspects that we all have missed is what if she were a teaching device used for say a medicine woman or midwife. This is one that I find interesting in theory and might explain some of the treatment the arms. my other thought was the artist much like myself just doesn't do good arms and hands. Each article I have read has added more questions and really I am no closer than before when wondering why she was created.
ReplyDeleteThat is an interesting point you made about more works depicting women rather than man surfaced from the time period. It makes sense to me because as I read the article, it became clear to me that regardless of why it was truly created all theories revolve around the importance of a woman's ability to give life, whether literally or as the spirit of the earth. The people of the time were clearly fully aware of this and chose to show it respect through works such as Willendorf. I am curious as to how long it would take an individual of the time to create a piece like Willendorf.
ReplyDelete-Tom
I think it is tough to claim that this sculpture shows the prominence of women. Perhaps it shows instead that a woman created this piece, since it is a very realistic portrayal of a chubby female form. I don't think it would have been as hard as some have said fr a woman of this time to become larger set. If this was crafted by a woman I think it is safer to assume that women were more sedentary (therefor more likely to take the time to sculpt, weave, carve etc.) than their prehistoric male counterparts than it is to assume they had a more prominent/respected role than their male counterparts. I guess I'm saying that to me it suggests different roles for genders more than it suggests different levels of power/respect for gender.
ReplyDelete