Rhetoric and Innovation in Hellenistic Art By Kristen Seaman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2020. Pp. 206. $99.99. ISBN 9781108490917 (cloth).
2022; Archaeological Institute of America; Volume: 126; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1086/721572
ISSN1939-828X
Autores Tópico(s)Classical Antiquity Studies
ResumoPrevious articleNext article FreeBook ReviewRhetoric and Innovation in Hellenistic Art By Kristen Seaman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2020. Pp. 206. $99.99. ISBN 9781108490917 (cloth).Stephanie M. Langin-HooperStephanie M. Langin-HooperDepartment of Art History Southern Methodist University Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreThis volume explores the role of Greek education in the choices made by artists and their royal patrons in the production of Hellenistic-era art in Ptolemaic Alexandria (Egypt) and Attalid Pergamon (Turkey). Three artworks are given detailed consideration: the Telephos Frieze from the interior of the Great Altar of Pergamon, the Archelaos Relief (discovered in Italy but often connected to Ptolemaic Alexandria), and the now lost Unswept Room mosaic of Sosos, originally from Pergamon but known from Roman copies. These three artworks are broadly recognizable, indeed famous, within the corpus of Hellenistic art—but they are also esoteric and “extraordinary” (30). Seaman convincingly links many of the innovative aspects of the three artworks to Greek rhetorical training in the Hellenistic period, which promoted a student’s development of specific skills such as diegema (the exercise of narration) and ekphrasis (the technique of description). That the Hellenistic “liberal arts package” (9) was integrated in such a sophisticated way into artworks that were sponsored by the same kings and queens who also amassed some of the greatest libraries of the ancient world makes a great deal of sense—and Seaman does an excellent job of articulating the evidence for this on a granular level.However, this reviewer would have found the book as a whole more compelling had Seaman confined her argument to these three particular works, or perhaps a more substantial yet well-defined corpus, rather than trying to extrapolate her approach to all of Hellenistic art. While Seaman’s reconstruction of the role of artists in the Hellenistic courts is lively and evocative, her attempt to homogenize Hellenistic art is unconvincing—particularly in the way it ignores display contexts and audience access to the works under consideration. The three artworks that Seaman analyzes in depth were all sponsored by royal patrons who had well-known intellectual leanings, and they were displayed to a limited audience (probably of similarly educated, like-minded elites) in restricted or private spaces in two capital cities. A spectacle of erudition makes sense in such contexts, but that does not mean that it would have been equally welcomed or appropriate everywhere. Indeed, Seaman’s analysis is informative precisely because the three artworks she examines are not representative examples of Hellenistic art—the use of narrative progression on the Telephos Frieze and the tiered composition of the Archelaos Relief are exceptional rather than typical, suggesting the need for specialized modes of inquiry. But the reader who can overlook the broad framing of the book will happily discover that it is not crucial to appreciating the importance of the case studies themselves.Of the three case studies, the discussion of the Telephos Frieze (ch. 2) is the most innovative and compelling. Seaman argues that the interior visual landscape of the Great Altar constructed a synkrisis (comparison) between the biography of Pergamon’s mythical founder, Telephos, and Pergamon’s current king, Eumenes II—to the benefit of the latter—in a manner that echoed the tradition of writing and comparing parallel biographies, best known from Plutarch’s Parallel Lives. Among the contextual data Seaman helpfully provides, it would have been useful if she had articulated for a nonspecialist reader just how inaccessible the Telephos Frieze was to an ancient visitor: the entrance to the Great Altar faced away from the main road up to the acropolis (a fact that its exterior Gigantomachy Frieze was designed to accommodate, as its most important scenes are on the back of the altar, easily visible to passersby), and the altar’s enormous staircase, overlooking the precipitous drop-off of the acropolis cliff side, would have discouraged all visitors except those most assured of their permission to enter the interior sacred space. In this reviewer’s opinion, discussing the limited, privileged audience for the Telephos Frieze would have strengthened Seaman’s argument that the “unusual narrative form” (52) of the artwork—which is the “only preserved instance of a continuously told story in Greek art” (55)—was shaped by the intellectualism of rhetorical practice. I was also convinced by Seaman’s argument that many of the details of the Telephos Frieze were selected in order for Eumenes II to make the claim that both he and his dynastic ancestor held a “dual status of both Greek and Asian” (64), although I was admittedly surprised by Seaman’s emphasis on this possibility, given the antipathy she expresses in chapter 1 to exploring cultural interaction as a generative force in Hellenistic art. Indeed, Seaman’s analysis of the Telephos Frieze is an excellent example of how both scholarly lenses—investigating the role of Greek rhetorical education, and the impacts of cross-cultural interaction—can be productively used in tandem.In the book’s other two case studies, Seaman’s detailed readings of the artworks in light of rhetorical education are also convincing. The long discussion of the personifications on the Archelaos Relief (ch. 3), which carefully contextualizes them both within the wider corpus of Greek art as well as within rhetorical practice, was a highlight of the book. Similarly compelling was Seaman’s argument in chapter 4 that the realism and trompe l’oeil effects of the Unswept Room mosaic were a visual parallel to the rhetorical technique of ekphrasis, a type of description that focuses not just on the appearance but also on the spatial and temporal situation of its subject. In this reading, as well as the brief discussion (121–22) of how ekphrasis might more generally explain the heightened level of detail to be found in much of Hellenistic art, the reader is offered a glimpse into the specifics of how Seaman’s proposal regarding the influence of rhetoric might be applied to other Hellenistic artworks (although, to be sure, the details on the Terme Boxer, seen in fig. 4.7, would seem to open a much deeper ekphrastic narrative than the folds of an expensive garment, seen in fig. 4.6). However, in both chapters 3 and 4, Seaman’s concluding interpretations about the meaning of each artwork rely rather heavily on conjecture. For instance, with the Unswept Room mosaic, Seaman argues that banqueting guests would have been repulsed, even offended, by such a messy depiction, and thus that the mosaic was either the artist’s attempt to make a joke at the expense of his royal patron or, conversely, it was a visual foil that allowed the king to distinguish the Greek orderliness of the real-world parties that he hosted from the less refined drinking practices of “non-Greeks” (131). While this interpretation seems well-situated within the games of the symposion, in my opinion it does not fully account for the immersive experience that the mosaic constructs. Whether or not the king’s guests dropped real lobster shells and chicken legs on the floor, they were dining in “trash” regardless (125)—or, read more positively, the castoffs of luxury—and when viewing this highly realistic mosaic in dim light it would be difficult to tell the difference. Thus, I would suggest that the mosaic intentionally blurred the distinction between art and life in order to extend the temporal remit of its ekphrastic narrative to encompass all banquets in the king’s dining room—past, present, and future—rather than to create the sharp divisions of time and space necessary to draw moralistic distinctions (such as between the Pergamene king and a drunken Celtic chieftain) in the manner Seaman proposes.Overall, this book is lucid, very well researched, and sufficiently illustrated (including color plates of the mosaics)—accessible to students and scholars alike. Bridging the gap that often exists between the study of Hellenistic intellectual history and Hellenistic art history, Seaman’s thesis regarding the influence of rhetorical education on visual culture is an innovative and welcome contribution to the already extensive scholarship generated by the three artworks that she studies. Although its applicability to any other particular Hellenistic artwork should be carefully considered on a case-by-case basis, Seaman’s addition of an important new tool to the analytical repertoire of Hellenistic art historians will be greatly appreciated.Notes[email protected] Previous articleNext article DetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Journal of Archaeology Volume 126, Number 4October 2022 The journal of the Archaeological Institute of America Views: 265Total views on this site Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/721572 Views: 265Total views on this site HistoryPublished online July 05, 2022 Copyright © 2022 by the Archaeological Institute of AmericaPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.
Referência(s)