Week Seven

Honestly, I think Winckelmann's influence is quite impressive.  The man stated and enforced his opinion which managed to shape the perspectives of viewers and artists up to centuries later so far.  Even though he may have been incorrect about the basis of his argument, he still convinced pretty much all of Western Society that sculpture is most beautiful when plain and uncolored, as well as assisting in the beginnings of art history and archaeology.
It is hard to say whether or not our society would have eventually drawn the same conclusions about art and sculpture if the Greeks' paint and colors had remained on their works long enough archaeologists to see how Greek art looked originally. Perhaps the idea of simple white sculpture being the purest and most sophisticated would have come to us no matter what we found. I am sure this we would have reached this mindset at some point, but the real question is if we did not have white Greek sculpture to look at and consider "classical", would white become an ideal as a trend or as permanently or timeless as it has been? We may phase in and out of valuing busyness and colorfulness since the Greeks, but the cold white of marble has always been considered classic, timeless, and sophisticated - the epitome of sculpture. Personally, I prefer the white because it leaves room for shape and shadow to speak at first viewing, although color does add a lot of interest and can make an image easier to look at for longer time periods. I am inclined to think society would have come to agree with this whether we looked to Greek sculpture or not.
I wonder if it was popular at all for Greeks to color only simply or subtly or if all sculpture was as bright and interesting to the eye as some modern reconstructions are. For instance, the archer in the lecture (from the West pediment of the Temple of Aphaia) was shown next to a rather brightly colored reconstruction with busy patterns on the sleeves and leggings. The way the original looks today may be pleasant for our minds to appreciate, but the reconstruction appeals only to the eye by giving it plenty to look at as one walks by. I would prefer to have something simple and subtle for me to ponder at for a little while and assess what makes it beautiful, but I think modern reconstructions make Greek sculpture more logical for the time. The way that art functioned in that society was not for expression or contemplation necessarily.  Artwork had purposes other than just existing.  Ancient Greek art was there to make necessary, functioning objects (religious, spiritual, or mundane) more interesting to look at. The more color and designs included, the more an average type person could look at it and appreciate it without getting bored.  You can see this from the statues of the Hellenistic period all the way back to the vases of the Geometric period. If artwork functioned then as it does now, then it would have made sense for the colors to be omitted right at the get-go. We look at those marble sculptures to analyze and appreciate raw beauty and form, but that just was not what the Ancient Greeks were necessarily after.
Winckelmann may not have had all the facts, but he had the good idea to appreciate what he had in front of him. I think the sculpture we have now is serving a purpose even without its original color for modern artists - so long as we keep current functions separate from historical contexts.