Friday, December 12, 2008

Which Came First?

Which came first--art or architecture? It could be argued that first was architecture, a place to live, a place for protection, a home where within one could hang artworks. Yet paintings were found within the Palaeolithic caves of Lasqaux long before man desired architectural design. The prehistoric paintings present a reverse argument that art preceded architecture. Natural caverns in the earth surely can not be considered architecture. Shelter, yes, but not architecture.

8 comments:

  1. Hi Nita
    Your new blog looks great. I know nothing about architecture, so can't contribute anything useful! But I do love those caves :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think this is a great idea and believe it is going to do well for you. You may delete this as I have nothing I feel I can say on the subject but when you speak of caves with art in them...Do you think the art was for the sake of art or was it a way to document things and it was safe from the elements? I do not know??

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Nita, I too love the new blog. I love the clean and clear colours, the clean and clear design of it. I hope it will be that for you what you are hoping for.
    I am sorry when I also can nothing say intelligent about architecture. But your blogs look great and I wish you much luck with it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This looks terrific Nita, you are impressing the heck out of me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Tracy, Janie, Doris, Verena ... Thanks for your comments. Those caves are really wonderful, aren't they? They were closed to the public as the paintings were starting to deteriorate with the human presence introducing carbon dioxide and humidity. You probably read that on the link I posted. That is the best site I've ever seen on the Lasqaux Caves.

    It's fun to imagine why the art was put there on the walls of those caves. Was it part of ritual of storytelling? I have read that ... then again, how can anyone really know when they are as old as they are. Any thought about why the art is there is purely speculation, in my opinion, no matter who the scientist is. Maybe that is the way life was documented before the written word. Maybe it was some creative caveman (or woman) who decorated the cave-house. That's kind of a nice vision. How can scientists be so sure who put the paintings there and why? Have people really changed throughout the history of this earth, or was the yearning to create art (just as we yearn to create art) always ingrained genetically in the human mind and soul?

    ReplyDelete
  6. It looks very nice Nita. I don't know much about architecture but I did enjoy looking at the cave drawings.I am in awe of you. You must be very good at managing your time.
    Ellie

    ReplyDelete
  7. Great blog Nita! As for which came first...I don't know. Art in all forms is really magical when you think about it. The moment man/woman was able to ponder something other than mere survival must have been a holy or sacred conception of some sort. I mean...what an incredible thing to pick up a piece of charcoal and CREATE an image for the first time...or the singing of the first song...or the building of a fine shelter...I think art, in all forms is a spiritual act/expression. I realize one art form may have come before another but I seem to be stuck on wrapping my mind around the fact that we can create anything at all! Keep up the great work my wonderously creative and energetic friend!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mary, you have such insight. Can you just imagine the first time someone created an image! You have seen beyond the mere doing of it and sensed the spiritual expression of it.

    ReplyDelete