# Your favourite Era for the Arts



## Taggart

What historical moment /artistic era (all arts combined musical, literary and visual (plastic arts)) would you have liked to have lived in and why?

If you choose other, please give full details.

Apologies for the Western bias, please feel free to redress the balance.

Thanks to TalkingHead for the idea.


----------



## aleazk

Modern and Contemporary.


----------



## JohannesBrahms

I chose the Romantic Era. First, it is my favorite era of music, producing such composers as Brahms, Liszt, and Rachmaninoff. I mostly like to read classics and there are many from the Romantic Era I enjoy. I'm not so big on the visual arts as some people, so that didn't really factor into my decision.

By the way, nice thread.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Would have _LOVED_ to live in the Weimar Republic! 1919 to 1933 in Germany!!! Huge burst of culture and modernism and cabaret


----------



## Guest

Taggart said:


> [...] Thanks to TalkingHead for the idea.


What a cow you are, you kilt-wearing Norwich fellow!


----------



## Guest

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Would have _LOVED_ to live in the Weimar Republic! 1919 to 1933 in Germany!!! Huge burst of culture and modernism and cabaret


Yes, that's it for me, too!


----------



## Guest

I voted for "Modern" (strictly 1920s Berlin) for the reasons given above by CoAG. Imagine: Schoenbergian cabarets, the opium, the champagne (or the cheaper _Sekt_), the relatively new sexual emancipation, the fashion, the whole cultural crucible ... magnificent times. OK, the dentistry would have been crude, but still, what times, what times !!!!


----------



## Ingélou

TalkingHead said:


> What a cow you are, you kilt-wearing Norwich fellow!


Well, aren't you the deceptive one?

Manners maketh man.


----------



## Ingélou

It's really awkward, when one is considering all the arts. I thought at first the Victorian period, as I love the pre-Raphaelites & there'd be Tennyson in poetry, and a lot of nice nineteenth century composers with a bit of medieval revival. But the dates given don't correspond: I'd be looking for 1870-1910, Aesthetic through to Belle Epoque.

So in the end, I voted for 'Classical'. No Bach, Handel or Lully, but there would be Mozart. And in literature, I'd get Keats, Wordsworth & Jane Austen; and in art, Reynolds & Gainsborough. A highly cultured, civilised, graceful age.


----------



## Kleinzeit

Oh, yeah!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

In most of the arts Classical was on its way out in the 1790s


----------



## Taggart

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> In most of the arts Classical was on its way out in the 1790s


Most of the time, I used Musical periods.


----------



## Ingélou

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> In most of the arts Classical was on its way out in the 1790s


That's right. Only 5 years till Wordsworth's Lyrical Ballads, the start of Romanticism in Eng Lit. But writers like Jane Austen carried on the classicism of Dr Johnson, and there was the Empire Line & the Grand Tour to give the age a 'classical feel'. Even a Romantic like Keats spends time writing about Grecian Urns, Hyperion & Psyche.

The trouble is, both the dates and the labels aren't quite right. Taggart used music labels from Wiki. But I suppose whatever dates and labels one chose, there'd be room to quibble.  Interesting to hear people's views, though.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Ingenue said:


> That's right. Only 5 years till Wordsworth's Lyrical Ballads, the start of Romanticism in Eng Lit. But writers like Jane Austen carried on the classicism of Dr Johnson, and there was the Empire Line & the Grand Tour to give the age a 'classical feel'. Even a Romantic like Keats spends time writing about Grecian Urns, Hyperion & Psyche.
> 
> The trouble is, both the dates and the labels aren't quite right. Taggart used music labels from Wiki. But I suppose whatever dates and labels one chose, there'd be room to quibble.  Interesting to hear people's views, though.


Well I trust you know more about literature than I do.


----------



## Ingélou

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well I trust you know more about literature than I do.


Possibly. I have degrees in English Literature & taught it to A-level, so it was my bread & butter. But I take your point, CoAG. 1750-1820 is a daft stretch of time for literature, covering the end of the Augustan age & almost the whole of the Romantic era. I defer to you in music, as I'm very new. 'Classical' itself is a weasel word, though, isn't it? It has so many possible meanings.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Ingenue said:


> Possibly. I have degrees in English Literature & taught it to A-level, so it was my bread & butter. But I take your point, CoAG. 1750-1820 is a daft stretch of time for literature, covering the end of the Augustan age & almost the whole of the Romantic era. I defer to you in music, as I'm very new. 'Classical' itself is a weasel word, though, isn't it? It has so many possible meanings.


That's true. And "Classical" does also refer to the arts and architecture etc. in ancient Rome or Greece (which one? or is it both?), Jacques-Louis David was a painter in the 18th century who was inspired by a lot of this stuff and his paintings are called "Neo-Classical," so it's all rather ambiguous really.


----------



## Guest

Ingenue said:


> Well, aren't you the deceptive one?
> Manners maketh man.


Dear Ingénue, please don't misunderstand my usual (misplaced and misjudged) tongue-in-cheek way of saying 'I love you, Taggart'. I was merely trying to say how embarrassed I was at Taggart giving me praise for launching the idea for this thread (whilst not having the courage to do so myself). I did notice however that Taggart's avatar depicts a fellow in a kilt. 'Nuff said?


----------



## Taggart

Hence other and give full details. When you combine arts you get problems because they move at different rates.

Also people may want different bits e.g. Shakespeare runs over from Renaissance to Baroque - that's the problem of dates. Even using the labels without the dates isn't infallible.

Ho Hum.


----------



## Ingélou

I agree with you, CoAg.
I suppose people will just have to plump for one of the periods but explain their thinking in a post. It would be nice to hear what members think about art & literature and whether it 'goes with' their preferred music or not.

My preferred music is 17th century; preferred literature is 'a long 18th century' (1720-1820); preferred art, late Victorian. 
So I compromised on 'Classical' 1750-1820.


----------



## Taggart

TalkingHead said:


> Dear Ingénue, please don't misunderstand my usual (misplaced and misjudged) tongue-in-cheek way of saying 'I love you, Taggart'. I was merely trying to say how embarrassed I was at Taggart giving me praise for launching the idea for this thread (whilst not having the courage to do so myself). I did notice however that Taggart's avatar depicts a fellow in a kilt. 'Nuff said?


Man up and take your praise quietly without making a fuss.


----------



## Ingélou

TalkingHead said:


> Dear Ingénue, please don't misunderstand my usual (misplaced and misjudged) tongue-in-cheek way of saying 'I love you, Taggart'. I was merely trying to say how embarrassed I was at Taggart giving me praise for launching the idea for this thread (whilst not having the courage to do so myself). I did notice however that Taggart's avatar depicts a fellow in a kilt. 'Nuff said?


Well, all right, then! I'll forgive you... 
Just remember what Kipling said (somewhat ungrammatically): 'The female of the species is more deadlier than the male'!

(PS It was an excellent idea for a thread, btw!)


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Almost everything I like (I'll have to make do with very late *Sibelius,* but that was when he was at his best) fits between 1920 and 1980, I'd like to expand it though to be from about 1915 to 1981 ie. *Sibelius's* later works all the way through to the end of the Tom Baker era on Doctor Who.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Ingenue said:


> Well, all right, then! I'll forgive you...
> Just remember what Kipling said (somewhat ungrammatically): 'The female of the species is *more deadlier* than the male'!


Are you sure that's good English?


----------



## Ravndal

Should have included Rococo 

My vote vent to Impressionist, which started much much earlier than 1890!


----------



## Ingélou

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Are you sure that's good English?


It isn't; but it's what Kipling wrote. Probably trying to be colloquial-funny, a la Barrack Room Ballads, plus 'more deadly' doesn't scan as well.


----------



## Ingélou

Ingenue said:


> It isn't; but it's what Kipling wrote. Probably trying to be colloquial-funny, a la Barrack Room Ballads, plus 'more deadly' doesn't scan as well.


Oops!

Actually, we just looked it up, and it's 'more deadly' and 'must be deadlier' than the male. I do remember it quoted on the BBC as 'more deadlier' & it appears in a video as the same, so that's my excuse!

Please pardon me - I have to crawl under the table now...


----------



## Novelette

I chose Baroque, and not without difficulty!

Monteverdi, Lully, Campra, Rameau, Bach, Destouches, etc., etc.

And then there's art: Champaigne, Rigaud, Rembrandt, Bernini, etc., etc.... the architecture of Lemercier, etc., etc.

And especially important is the lifetime of John Milton, which beautifully falls in this category.


----------



## ProudSquire

In terms of the visual, I'd have to go with the Baroque era, but my hearing lies else where.


----------



## Guest

Novelette said:


> I chose Baroque, and not without difficulty!
> Monteverdi, Lully, Campra, Rameau, Bach, Destouches, etc., etc.
> And then there's art: Champaigne, Rigaud, Rembrandt, Bernini, etc., etc.... the architecture of Lemercier, etc., etc.
> And especially important is the lifetime of John Milton, which beautifully falls in this category.


OK Novelette, we get your 'preferences', but why else would you have liked to live in this period? The clothes? The disease? The infant mortality? The prevalent 'philosophical mindset'? This, for me, is the true nature of this poll.


----------



## Ingélou

Novelette, you do have a point. If I'd gone with those dates, I'd have had the Metaphysical Poets, Hamlet (my fave Shakespeare play) & the other Big Tragedies, and painters like Vermeer. Also the start of the Augustans, with my 'best poet', Alexander Pope. 

Chiz!


----------



## Ingélou

And you have a point, TalkingH. Have you voted for Contemporary (so as to avoid World War II)?


----------



## Guest

So (to drum up a bit of interest), I repeat (and expand) why I would have loved to have lived in the 1920s. It would have to be in Berlin (maybe Vienna), not really London so much, certainly not Madrid or Barcelona (15 years later, yes, certainly). No, Berlin it is : the film, the music, the cabaret, the conservatoire (Schoenberg and Schreker), the architecture, the beer ...


----------



## Ingélou

Sorry I didn't notice your stated preference; it was a bit too near your *other* remark. 

The period that I chose by default (1750-1820) does have the bonus of including members of the Norwich School, Crome & John Sell Cotman (earlier works, anyway). Cotman lived in the Norfolk seaside town where we now reside, and we pass his house on our way to the market square. 









Greta Bridge (Cumberland) 1805, by John Sell Cotman


----------



## Taggart

TalkingHead said:


> So (to drum up a bit of interest), I repeat (and expand) why I would have loved to have lived in the 1920s. It would have to be in Berlin (maybe Vienna), not really London so much, certainly not Madrid or Barcelona (15 years later, yes, certainly). No, Berlin it is : the film, the music, the cabaret, the conservatoire (Schoenberg and Schreker), the architecture, the beer ...


Barcelona at the end of the Civil War and the collapse of the Catalan government? Madrid during the siege when the government fled to Valencia?

You're not one of those aiming to get bonus points by choosing the Black Death or the Plague years and the Great Fire of London, are you?


----------



## Ingélou

I'm assuming we only have to choose the era which most perfectly combines our favoured art, literature & music. I've decided to 'pass' on the worldview, the plumbing, the disease, the rats, the fleas, the social injustice, the violence, the class system & anything else that doesn't suit me.

I am opting for the culture, and nothing but the culture. To quote (or knowing me, to misquote) a character in Moliere, 'And as for living, the servants can do that for us...'


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Ingenue said:


> I bet your favourite cheese is an eye-wateringly decrepit Stilton, isn't it?


YUM I LOVE STILTON but not as much as I love ROQUEFORT!!!!


----------



## Ingélou

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> YUM I LOVE STILTON but not as much as I love ROQUEFORT!!!!


Oh, sorry, CoAG, I changed my post. For the benefit of readers who may be wondering if we both have wool for wits, I originally quoted Talking Head's desire to live in decadent 1920s Berlin, and supposed that he had a similar taste in choosing the most decadent cheese I could think of.

Then I changed it, because I love Stilton too. I remember we bought a whole one once when we lived near Stilton. It was too big for the fridge, so we kept it in a cupboard during the hot summer months & brought it out for family gatherings. It became the most disgusting, decrepit & delicious cheese you could imagine ... everyone asked for second helpings.

I should mention that I wouldn't dare do that now. This was in the 1980s. Don't want to tip off the 'ealth & safety police!


----------



## norman bates

in modern times there's not only great painting, sculpture, literature, poetry, architecture but also movies, comics, illustration (it existed before but in my opinion it bloomed in the twentieth century and often it's even better than painting). And music today means not only classical music but also jazz, rock, blues, folk, world etc. So my vote it's obvious.


----------



## deggial

TalkingHead said:


> OK Novelette, we get your 'preferences', but why else would you have liked to live in this period? The clothes? The disease? The infant mortality? The prevalent 'philosophical mindset'? This, for me, is the true nature of this poll.


I thought the point of the thread was which artistic period one liked best? as in, the art of which period, not so much the downsides of which period. I like illuminated manuscripts a lot but I wouldn't particularly have liked to live during medieval times.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Romantic for music and painting. As for literature, I enjoy a great variety, from the early Middle Ages until now.


----------



## Ingélou

Renaissance - 1450-1600 - would be good to choose, if one didn't have to get embroiled in religious & political conflicts. I'd get early Shakespeare & my beloved Robin Hood ballads & Chevy Chase; sonnets by Drayton & Sir Philip Sidney; some older Old Masters; & some lovely Byrd & Tallis. But the fashions are a bit of a no-no, what with farthingales & codpieces!


----------



## Ingélou

It actually makes me wonder why High Fashion always seems so stupid, especially for women. Classics include - shave your hairline & eyebrows (Middle Ages); farthingales & ruffs (Elizabethan); wearing a sofa-shaped skirt (Queen Anne); powdering your hair & draping it over a frame (18th century); the crinoline (Victorian); the puffball skirt (eighties) & so on. Odd how many times High Fashion seems to want to make us look like hens.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Ingenue said:


> It actually makes me wonder why High Fashion always seems so stupid, especially for women. Classics include - shave your hairline & eyebrows (Middle Ages); farthingales & ruffs (Elizabethan); wearing a sofa-shaped skirt (Queen Anne); powdering your hair & draping it over a frame (18th century); the crinoline (Victorian); the puffball skirt (eighties) & so on. Odd how many times High Fashion seems to want to make us look like *hens*.


Think _younger_ hens. Where do you think do you think the word "chic" for fashionable came from, or even the more informal word "chick" for young woman?


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

I'd probably have to go with the Baroque era. It would give me a great many of my favorite artists including Velazquez:










Vermeer:










Caravaggio:










*****


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Bernini:



















Rembrandt:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Van Dyck:










... and quite possibly my favorite artist of all time, Peter Paul Rubens:



To this we can add my absolute favorite composer, J.S. Bach... as well as more than a few other favorites: Handel, Vivaldi, Rameau, Zelenka, Biber, the Scarlattis, etc...

It would also give me Shakespeare, Milton, Spenser (quite possibly 3 of the 4 greatest writers in English... Chaucer being the 4th), Thomas Traherne, Robert Herrick, Pierre Ronsard, Racine, Moliere, Montaigne, Cervantes, Calderon, etc...

Of course the present era gives me greater access to all of these artist's works than I likely would have ever had during the Baroque era. Not even the wealthiest aristocrat, king, or emperor would have had access to the whole of Bach and Rameau and Rubens and Shakespeare and Cervantes etc... on a moment's notice.


----------



## tdc

For visual arts I would go with the Renaissance, for music the Baroque, as far as literature, I haven't a definite preference at the moment as I like too broad a range of things. I've noticed there seems to be a lag time between painting eras and music - the painters begin stylistic changes and the composers follow. But I see certain parallels between an artist like Da Vinci and Bach, even though they were separated in eras. I also like a lot of modern art and music. The 20th century seemed to be a time where a lot of the great elements of earlier eras were revisited.


----------



## davinci

Shouldn't the Modern period be from 1920 to about 1960? Architecture, literature, the arts; maybe I would live in that time.


----------



## Turangalîla

Hmmm, when did Shakespeare live? Along with Michelangelo, Raphael, Josquin, Palestrina, and Byrd?

Renaissance, please.


----------



## Ingélou

The trouble is, Shakespeare's Big Four Tragedies - Hamlet, MacBeth, King Lear, Othello - were written in the 1600s, technically the baroque. It's just too hard... !


----------



## Guest

So, the results so far are : Modern (leading position), Romantic and Baroque closely fighting their turf for second ...


----------



## norman bates

8 votes for the modern era, just one for the contemporary. It seems that many think that the "golden age" is finished.


----------



## Kleinzeit

steady on... don't count the pharaohs out yet


----------



## Guest

Kleinzeit said:


> View attachment 18954
> 
> steady on... don't count the pharaohs out yet


Très bien, Monsieur Lorre, on compte sur vous !


----------



## Kleinzeit

TalkingHead said:


> Très bien, Monsieur Lorre, on compte sur vous !


*rougeur*

J'annonce simplement à Ra


----------



## Sid James

I chose *Romantic, 1820-1890*. Its where my taste in the arts comes together more than for the other options.

From that period (roughly) here are a few favourites that come to mind:

*Music: *The biggies of the Romantic age (eg. Bruckner, Liszt, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Saint-Saens) and also tail end of some of two of the giants of late Classical ear (Beethoven, Schubert).

*Painting:* Turner, Delacroix, Constable, also beginnings of Impressionism (eg. Manet).

*Sculpture:* Rodin.

*Literature:* Dickens, Baudelaire.

*Architecture:* Admittedly I don't like it when Victorian era architecture got too florid and flamboyant, but some of the buildings of the period that emphasise restraint & elegance I do like. Often this is not the public buildings of the era, but more the domestic buildings.

*History:* The age of revolution and unification of countries (Germany, Italy, and of course emergence of France post 1789 as a republic). Three in France alone during this time - 1830, 1848, and the commune of 1871. You also got that year of revolutions across Europe, 1848. Of course, great to maybe be a witness, not so great if you're at the end of a gun pointed at you. Artistic types weren't immune to this. Look at Wagner going in exile after 1848, or the painter Pissarro who had to go into hiding after the commune. So, a great thing in inspiring these people to fight for what they believed in, but the aftermath was bloody. Similarly interesting period in history of other areas, including Asia-Pacific region.

Other strong options could have been Classical era, Impressionism or Modern era. But with these, my interests don't kind of come together as much - eg. I like Modern art and music, am okay with literature (but not architecture, or most of it), but I dislike many of the hard line ideologies associated with all of it. As for history, its an area of focus, but sometimes I wish I was ignorant of it, its not very positive (save a few people - but they made a big difference!).


----------



## Geo Dude

I voted for classical era, since Haydn, Mozart and to a lesser extent Beethoven tend to be my bread and butter. I do dip into the baroque and (less often) into the romantic period (especially Brahms!) and 20th century, but I always find myself centered in the classical era after a while. I find it difficult to factor in all arts as a whole into my decision since I read widely from different eras and have not yet structured my reading properly and taken account of where my favorites come from, though I suspect I would find myself polarized if I did. On the one hand I'm fascinated by ancient Greece (probably the only era in which I could claim any serious interest in sculpture _and_ literature), but I'm also a sci-fi (and video game, but let's not argue over whether they constitute art or not) nut, which puts me firmly into the 20th century. Oh, and I certainly wouldn't mind if Goethe and Enlightenment philosophers took up plenty of space on my bookshelf, either. Sorry that I can't be specific, but I'm not sure where I should be yet on literature (though I do admit to a bias toward the 20th century here) and I freely admit to being ignorant of visual art/architecture with the exception of certain interesting characters like Da Vinci.

...See my point about the polarization?


----------



## presto

I'm very passionate about Art Deco, a very short period compared to some movements but it influenced so much.
From buildings, cars, to even ordinary domestic objects such as door handles, radios or fire places.
The clean lines and geometric shapes really excite me!


----------



## Novelette

TalkingHead said:


> OK Novelette, we get your 'preferences', but why else would you have liked to live in this period? The clothes? The disease? The infant mortality? The prevalent 'philosophical mindset'? This, for me, is the true nature of this poll.


I have to admit to not having read the OP. I answered the poll question as I saw it: in the context, in a vacuum, of favorite era for the arts.


----------



## Guest

Novelette said:


> I have to admit to not having read the OP. I answered the poll question as I saw it, in the context of, in a vacuum, of favorite era for the arts.


Don't worry about it, Little Novel !!


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Yeah, the poll and OP are quite different. I'd definitely live in the here and now, even with the antipathy against classical, but I would vote for the whole Romantic Era-- 20th Century for music and art.


----------



## Ondine

Contemporary. Why?

Because it is the present moment. The most precious and perfect one that can be experienced.


----------



## Kleinzeit

still no love for the busy days?


----------



## tdc

Kleinzeit said:


> View attachment 19220
> 
> 
> still no love for the busy days?


I love Egyptian art and architecture, but my personal belief is that Egypt's great masterworks, pre-date the dates in this poll and are the work of an earlier civilization, quite a bit more advanced than ours (ever read Graham Hancock's book _Fingerprints of the Gods_?). I think much of the Egyptian art and architecture that survives from these later periods are largely the Egyptians attempting to copy the style of this earlier culture (and often failing miserably). If there was an option to vote for a period of Atlantis dating somewhere closer to around 10,000 BC I probably would've voted for it!


----------



## Kleinzeit

I change my vote!!


----------



## BurningDesire

The era in-which I am working :3


----------



## Chrythes

tdc said:


> I love Egyptian art and architecture, but my personal belief is that Egypt's great masterworks, pre-date the dates in this poll and are the work of an earlier civilization, quite a bit more advanced than ours (ever read Graham Hancock's book _Fingerprints of the Gods_?). I think much of the Egyptian art and architecture that survives from these later periods are largely the Egyptians attempting to copy the style of this earlier culture (and often failing miserably). If there was an option to vote for a period of Atlantis dating somewhere closer to around 10,000 BC I probably would've voted for it!


Or might be it... ALIENS?!


----------



## tdc

Chrythes said:


> Or might be it... ALIENS?!
> View attachment 19321


Haha, _Ancient Aliens_ was a pretty interesting show! As you might guess I would personally surmise that yes, the civilization of Atlantis did make contact with extra-terrestrials, so, yes. That is actually an area of Hancock's book I don't agree with (he felt that extra-terrestrials weren't involved with the ancient civilizations discussed in his book _Fingerprints of the Gods_). However, I do believe he has more recently changed his mind on that subject.

The idea that modern civilization started around 3,000 BC coinciding with these unbelievable structures (that we can't reduplicate with modern technology), and that they were built by a society that hadn't yet invented the wheel, isn't supported by a lot of evidence. Hancock's book lays out scientific data that shows how *unlikely* it is that the great pyramids were created by Egyptian Pharaohs ruling these early societies just out of the hunter/gatherer stage.

Although I do agree with kleinzeit that the ancient Egyptians did create a lot of great art.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Off the sauce hey


----------



## Chrythes

tdc said:


> Haha, _Ancient Aliens_ was a pretty interesting show! As you might guess I would personally surmise that yes, the civilization of Atlantis did make contact with extra-terrestrials, so, yes. That is actually an area of Hancock's book I don't agree with (he felt that extra-terrestrials weren't involved with the ancient civilizations discussed in his book _Fingerprints of the Gods_). However, I do believe he has more recently changed his mind on that subject.
> 
> The idea that modern civilization started around 3,000 BC coinciding with these unbelievable structures (that we can't reduplicate with modern technology), and that they were built by a society that hadn't yet invented the wheel, isn't supported by a lot of evidence. Hancock's book lays out scientific data that shows how *unlikely* it is that the great pyramids were created by Egyptian Pharaohs ruling these early societies just out of the hunter/gatherer stage.
> 
> Although I do agree with kleinzeit that the ancient Egyptians did create a lot of great art.


But they were not "just out of the hunter stage", the Egyptian culture grew continuously from the Faiyum A period (9000 to 6000 BC), where they first settled around the Nile, where animal husbandry, pottery, weaving and agriculture emerged, during the Badarian period (4400 to 4000 BC) they began using copper, and the intensified trading of not only goods, but knowledge as well, that began during the Gerzeh period. The timeline provided at the end of this page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Egypt indicates that the Egyptian culture evolved during a long time, gradually developing new tools and techniques.

I think it's logical to assume that the Egyptians gradually developed building techniques, which were eventually used in building the Pyramids. Of course we might not yet know how exactly they built them, but wouldn't it be more useful, meaningful and respectful to try and understand how the Egyptians created these extraordinary buildings using the tools that were found of those periods, instead of creating conspiracy theories that are not only condescending to earlier civilizations, but also provide speculative information and essentially disregard all our knowledge and archaeological findings? It just baffles me that instead of accepting that we have yet to find tools/sites/sufficient information, we create theories that defy all logic.


----------



## Ingélou

It is amazing how many sophisticated techniques of jewel-making, engraving, silver work etc can't be replicated now. Chinese & even English crafts have been lost for ever. I too don't go for the 'alien' explanation. It's just that there have been clever, inventive people in all civilisations but if these arts aren't passed on or are superseded, they are forgotten.


----------



## tdc

Chrythes said:


> But they were not "just out of the hunter stage", the Egyptian culture grew continuously from the Faiyum A period (9000 to 6000 BC), where they first settled around the Nile, where animal husbandry, pottery, weaving and agriculture emerged, during the Badarian period (4400 to 4000 BC) they began using copper, and the intensified trading of not only goods, but knowledge as well, that began during the Gerzeh period. The timeline provided at the end of this page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Egypt indicates that the Egyptian culture evolved during a long time, gradually developing new tools and techniques.
> 
> I think it's logical to assume that the Egyptians gradually developed building techniques, which were eventually used in building the Pyramids. Of course we might not yet know how exactly they built them, but wouldn't it be more useful, meaningful and respectful to try and understand how the Egyptians created these extraordinary buildings using the tools that were found of those periods, instead of creating conspiracy theories that are not only condescending to earlier civilizations, but also provide speculative information and essentially disregard all our knowledge and archaeological findings? It just baffles me that instead of accepting that we have yet to find tools/sites/sufficient information, *we create theories that defy all logic*.


But do these theories defy all logic? What theories in Hancock's book defy all logic? Is it so much harder to believe some of these other theories than the theory that a culture using primitive tools, that hadn't yet invented the wheel created an architectural marvel beyond what our modern technology can produce? How does the theory you believe *not* defy all logic?

Did you know that these ancient societies regularly used stones weighing up to 400 tonnes in temples? Only a handful of machines exist in the world today that could move such a stone and they require weeks preparation time in advance and crews of 30 to 50 men - to move one stone! Did you know that the sarcophagus in the 'King's chamber' was hollowed out with tubular drills (none of which have been found) that can remove material 500 times faster than what can be achieved by modern diamond-headed power drills? And just how did the Egyptians move those *2.3 million* 2.5 ton blocks into place with such perfect mathematical precision? The consensus among Egyptologists is that these pyramids were built by 100,000 men over 2 decades. This would require these workers to work 10 hours a day, 365 days a year and to place 31 of these massive stones into precise mathematical positioning every hour. And you think they used ropes and pulley systems to do this?

Why are later attempts by the Egyptians to create pyramids (for example the Pyramid of Sahure dating 2450 BC) now just a dilapidated pile of ruins? So, somehow barely a century after the Great Pyramids were created the Egyptians just forgot how to do it?

Have you read Hancock's book? I've studied Egyptian culture in college, so I know the 'official story' as well as researching the topic on my own. If you haven't taken the time to research the topic outside of what is taught in schools - which by your own admittance does not explain these structures adequately then I don't think it is respectful on your part to completely write these other theories off. If you've read Hancock's book and can address any of the detailed arguments he has put down in there I would be happy to debate the issue with you. If you haven't read the book then I think maybe you are being a little prejudiced here.


----------



## Chrythes

First of all - the pyramids are not mathematically perfect. 
You can see the measurements here - http://www.math.washington.edu/~greenber/GizaPyramid.html. 
Although they are impressive, they are not 'perfectly precise'. Another imperfection is the 3 centimeters shift of the Southern wall of the King's Chamber, which caused the granite beams above it to crack.

The most recent and feasible theory of how the pyramids were constructed is the one by Jean-Pierre Houdini. I guess you are familiar with it, but if not this video should familiarize you with the concept. I am somewhat skeptic about it myself, since there is no direct evidence (though the density measurements are very interesting) for the internal ramps, but it's the only theory so far to hold itself in various engineering simulations and have as much evidence.

"This would require these workers to work 10 hours a day, 365 days a year and to place 31 of these massive stones into precise mathematical positioning every hour." This calculation depends entirely on the building technique. Is it based on the most recent one?

The saw cutting and the tubular drilling were quite well successfully accomplished by Denys. A. Stocks. in 1999. 
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Testi...working+methods+in+Aswan,+Upper...-a072501123

There were also failures at creating pyramids in earlier times, for example the Meidum pyramid that was unsuccessfully built ca. 2600 BC. As far as I have searched I do agree that the pyramids built after the Fourth Dynasty were of poorer quality and smaller, but here is something I found regarding Userkaf, the founder of the Fifth Dynasty - "It is believed[21]* that the construction of the sun temple marks a shift from the royal cult, so preponderant during the early 4th dynasty, to the cult of the sun god Re. The king was not revered directly as a god anymore but rather as the son of Re and this, in turn, changed the royal mortuary cult." 
* Ian Shaw The Oxford history of ancient Egypt p.98-99

Couldn't a shift in the ideology of the rulers at least partially explain the declining importance and thus the quality of the pyramids?

This is based on a few hours research that I made today. I haven't read the book, though I've heard many theories of this kind. My problems with them is that they get quickly outdated as we find out more, especially due to new technologies, diggings and theories (as with Jean Pierre), and they unreasonably underestimate the abilities of the early human civilizations.


----------



## Ingélou

My admiration for the romantic era has just been boosted by discovering the pre-Raphaelite paintings of Marie Spartali Stillman. Oh those colours - and what an ideal of feminine beauty she has captured.


----------



## lupinix

Romantic era  Favorite composers are Chopin and Rachmaninov.

Favorite Medieval is probably Solage though I don't know many yet
Favorite Renaissance so far Dunstaple, Dufay, Josquin and Byrd
Favorite Baroque so far Monteverdi, Frescobaldi, Vivaldi, Handel and of course JSBach
Favorite Classical probably Beethoven, or Mozart, or Haydn, or one of the Bachs....
Favorite Impressionist Ravel
Favorite Modern Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Messiaen, Bartok
Favorite Contemporary not sure yet frankly


----------



## Fortinbras Armstrong

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Would have _LOVED_ to live in the Weimar Republic! 1919 to 1933 in Germany!!! Huge burst of culture and modernism and cabaret


I've always wanted to live in pre-WWI Paris. With, of course, a ton of money. I would not have enjoyed the Weimar Republic, given the unsettled politics and the hyperinflation.

I read a memoire by Julia Child on her life in Paris in the late 1940s and 50's. I would have liked to have had some of the same experiences. (I was amused to note that she was on a ship from the US to Europe at _exactly_ the same time I was on another ship going from Europe to the US. Our ships must have passed each other.)

As far as art goes, it depends. I am very fond of impressionist painting, I am not fond of impressionist music.

A bit from Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado just went through my mind: "The idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone/All centuries but this and every country but his own."


----------



## hpowders

Wow! I would have to take a pass on voting in this one, if it's music. I love Baroque, Classical, Romantic and Modern music and will reach on my shelves randomly for any one of them on a given day.

But for painting, it would be Flemish Renaissance, no question about it.


----------



## sabrina

I voted based on my first thought about painting, as my favourites are the impressionists and the post impressionists, Van Gogh and Gaugin being on the first spot, ex aequo. As for music, my love starts chronologically, but not only, with Mozart and what follows up to the beginning of XX century. I am also mesmerized by, at least part if not all of Bach. That's quite wide, and does not perfectly match the poll, but in the end _classical_ would get the spot.


----------



## Blancrocher

My favorite era for the arts is this one--every masterwork is so unfamiliar and unexpected!

*edit* But, having looked at the poll, I have to say modern--too much good stuff, and still influential. 

*sigh*


----------



## Winterreisender

It sort of depends. 

I do like the Roman Era. It certainly contains my favourite verse literature (Ovid, Lucretius...) and the visual arts are pretty nice as well. I only wish we had some Roman music left!

The "modern" era is certainly my favourite for novels, but I can take or leave a lot of the music and paintings from this time.

For my favourite music, I seriously can't decide between Baroque, Classical and Romantic!


----------



## shangoyal

Not too much into any arts except music and movies. So, of couse, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven considered, the Classical era wins.


----------



## Taggart

Another one of the Buzz Feed quizzes -What Period In History Do You Really Belong In?

Very accurate - I got Renaissance Italy - Hey there, you style fiend! You're fine, fresh, and fierce to the core. You have an incredible appreciation for the finer things in life and are a total culture vulture. Keep up that Mona Lisa smile!

Ingélou is still laughing.


----------



## Ingélou

Taggart is chuffed to bits, but I say, 'The Scotsman Italianate is a MacDevil Incarnate'...
I got Elizabethan England - was pleased at first, thinking of Shakespeare, but then I realised that it wouldn't be all that jolly being a Catholic recusant in that era! 

I love these quizzes, though.


----------



## shangoyal

Nice quiz that - totally arbitrary it seems! I got Renaissance Italy, by the way.


----------



## aleazk

I got "Ancient Rome".... :lol:


----------



## Mahlerian

I managed to get...Incan Empire...

I don't get it either.


----------



## aleazk

Mahlerian said:


> I managed to get...Incan Empire...
> 
> I don't get it either.


:lol:..........................................:lol:


----------



## Guest

Incan, Aztek ... what do I care about such distant societies? As I have already stated on this thread some pages ago, it has to be - for me - the Berlin (and the Vienna) of the early 20th century. 
Another period that fascinates me is the milieu of Barcelona just before and during the Spanish civil war of 1936-39. But we are alive today and have enough revolutions and dislocations enough to occupy us.


----------



## Tristan

I'm not much of an art expert, but impressionism has always been my favorite period of art. Though I also love surrealism. Monet and Magritte are probably my two favorite painters.


----------

