pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on sun 8 feb 04
anyway with these things?
Hi Lili, all...
My understanding, is that the progression was from them
(that is, these ancient or 'pre-historic' female figurine
forms, whether rotund or not,) being at
first refered to figuratively, casually, as a 'Venus',
oweing
to the topical familiarity which the Venus de Milo had
enjoyed in the nineteenth century whe these kinds of forms
were first being brought to the attention of archeology in
general, and, as well to the public.
Thence, more recently, being rephrased in colloquial English
more-or-less, as
'Goddess'...since I suppose, enough people were getting
confused by the term 'Venus', oweing maybe to their
familiarity with the same term having been used to a denote
a neighboring Planet.
From there, gaining interpolations with the variations of
the new-age attempts to find or put meaning in how people
have entertained sympathies with Nature, or, in some Gaia
theory or sympathy with it, ( maybe as distinct from one's
palpable awarenesses in or as one's own sentience, where,
without which, theories may suffice to guide a dim
apprehension not otherwise Lived) in which Feminine energies
are understood to have become less appreciated than we may
have wished, and, or, how ancients are now supposed to have
been more ingenuously poised to celebrate them more
correctly, tenderly or respectfully, in ways as are now
supposed to include these or other depictions, hypothetical
rituals, 'figurines' and so on...
That's my layman's understanding...
More or less...
Phil
Las Vegas
----- Original Message -----
From: "lili krakowski"
Having read all the posts on the Fat Women in Ancient Clay,
and having read Gimbutas and similar, I think we are
assuming a lot.
Yes there is a bunch of figures of fat women. And we call
them Fertility Goddesses. Exactly why?
Because TO us they suggest goddesses? And if they are
rotund they have to do with fertility?
Some have suggested that fat women reflected well on the
wealth of their husbands. I remember having read that force
feeding women into obesity was, for some people, a way to
make them less likely to run away. (Other charming folk
used mutilation)
I just think "goddesses" very condescending and simplistic.
Sorry. These figurines could have been simple amulets such
as some little "Buddhas" and some fish. They could have had
medicinal purposes: maybe warmed and put on a wound, or
placed under or over a bed. Maybe they were some form of
good luck charms....like rabbits feet.
My point is that we tend to assume "primitive" religions
were more primitve in their views of the Divine than we, and
therefore the simplest artifact must represent God.
Does that mean that in 3000 years when they find figa or a
rabbit's foot, "they" will think them gods? I hope not.
To my way of thinking, the fat women may be anything from
weights used as weights, to portraits of the Goddess. But
until the Fat Lady sings we simply do not know.
Lili Krakowski
Be of good courage
____________________________________________________________
__________________
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your
subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
| |
|
