An Analysis of the Venus Gurines in Archaeological Literature And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Durham E-Theses From artifact to icon: an analysis of the Venus gurines in archaeological literature and contemporary culture Lander, Louise Muriel How to cite: Lander, Louise Muriel (2005) From artifact to icon: an analysis of the Venus gurines in archaeological literature and contemporary culture, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3027/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 FROM ARTIFACT TO ICON: An Analysis of the Venus Figurines in Archaeological Literature and Contemporary Culture Volume 2 of5 Louise Muriel Lander A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Durham Department of Archaeology 2004 A copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from nt should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. ~ 3 JUN 2005 CON'fEN'fS VOLUME2 CHAPTERS THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE CATEGORY Introduction 130 Prioritisation of the stylistic canon over variability 131 Application of the standard characterisation to selected examples 135 Emphasis and Neglect 137 Language 138 The use of prototypes 140 Proto-twical figures 141 Factors in the emergence ofpossible prototwes 143 The role ofthe prototype figures as representatives o[the class; their use as a basis for generalisation and comparison between examples 146 Problems with prototypes 152 Conclusions 158 CHAPTER6 CASE STUDIES Introduction 159 Case Study 1: The use of the 'lozenge composition' 160 Case Study 2: The impact of inclusion 167 Case Study 3: Ancient artifacts; contemporary meanings 172 Kostenki 83-2 and 87 173 Willendor[ 175 Grirnaldi I 'hermaphrodite 175 La Magdeleine 177 Laussef Double Figure 179 Reconstructions of{ragmentary figures 180 Conclusions of textual analysis section 182 Overview 182 Archaeological context and attribution bv style 183 Homogeneity and diversity 184 Prototypes 185 The creation of the Venus figurines in the literature 186 Can the Venus [lgurines be studied through the existing literature? 188 The present standing of the Venus figurines 189 CHAPTER 7 THE VENUS FIGURINES IN CONTEMPORARY CONTEXT: THE WORLD WIDE WEB Introduction 191 Researching on the World Wide Web 192 The Searches Conducted 192 Initial Search Results 194 Data Analysis 196 Sample size 196 Categorization ofsite type 196 Results: Analysis of the Sites 198 "Venus of Willendor[" 198 Information (I) sites 198 Retail Venus (RV) sites 201 Retail Other (RO) sites 206 New Age (NWA) sites 206 Organisations (0) sites 210 Feminist (FM) sites 212 Artists (ART) sites 213 Miscellaneous (MS) sites 219 "Venus of Laussel" 222 Information (I) sites 223 Retail Venus (R V) sites 223 New Age (NWA) sites 224 Organisations (0) sites 224 Artists (ART) sites 224 Miscellaneous (MS) sites 224 "Venus ofLespugue" 225 Information (I) sites 225 Retail Venus (R V) sites 225 Organisations (0) sites 226 "Venus ofDolni Vestonice" 226 Information (I) sites 226 Retail Venus (RV) sites 227 New Age (NWA) sites 227 Organisations (0) sites 228 Comparing representations, appropriations and uses of the figures 228 Information (I) sites 228 New Age (NWA) sites 229 Retail Venus (RV) sites 229 Miscellaneous (MS) sites 230 Artists (ART) sites 230 Organisations (0) sites 230 Feminist (FM) sites 230 Retail Other (RO) sites 231 Conclusions: analysis o[the sites 231 Comparative analysis: Stone Circles 232 Comparison of the utilisation of the figurines on the World Wide Web and approaches to them in archaeology 234 The influence of archaeology on the WWW 234 The nature o[the relationship betl1!een archaeology and the WWW 235 Obvious parallels betl1!een the archaeological literature and the WWW 236 The identification o[underlving correspondences in approaches and interpretation 238 Conclusions of the WWW analysis 240 CHAPTERS CONCLUSIONS 243 Overview 243 Wavs forward for the Venus figurines 245 Auto-critique 248 CHAPTER 5 'filE CONSOLllDlA 'flrON OF 'filE CATEGORY Introduction The previous chapter has identified that although the texts provide strong characterisations of the Venus figurines, these overlook the apparent diversity that exists within the class allowing the impression of homogeneity to be maintained. In this chapter, I will contend this impression can only be maintained through literary processes. This chapter will therefore discuss the means by which the texts actively homogenise the archaeological material through techniques that serve to standardise it. Through this analysis, I will demonstrate that the literature continues to present a restricted characterisation of this material, promoting the appearance of homogeneity with regard to the class as a whole, and encouraging and maintaining a 'popular' impression of the figurines themselves. The first section of this chapter discusses the manner in which a number of texts acknowledge the variability of the material, but nevertheless prioritise the stylistic canon. The second will examine how the standard characterisation is reiterated and consolidated in the texts through its association with and application to selected and frequently repeated examples. The third section identifies an important aspect in the process of prioritisation - the manner in which the authors present and consequently promote certain features in tem1s of emphasis and neglect. The fourth section will specifically discuss the role of language in the creation of an impression of homogeneity. In the fifth and final part of this analysis I will identify and explore the utilization of proto-typical figures in the literature. This draws on points made in section two, and in this section I will identify a number of figures that, through their frequent appearance in both text and illustration, may be viewed as possible prototype figures. As stated in my Introduction, I will consider their place in the operation of the category of Venus figurines, with particular reference to their uses in the literature as the basis for comparisons between figures and as representatives of the wider group. I will discuss the reasons why these figures have emerged as 130 prototypes, and to conclude this section I will identify and discuss the implications ofthis practice. Prioritisation of the stylistic canon over variability The previous chapter has shown examples of literature that promote the occunence of shared characteristics, while also providing evidence (from the same literature) of the diversity that exists within the class of Venus figurines. What holds the class together is a belief in the unifying nature of the claimed stylistic similarity between the figures, based on the repeated occunence of the features that constitute the stylistic canon. Repetition of these generalised features, at the expense of a focus on individual characteristics, has served to create this stylistic similarity as fact. The existence of the stylistic canon is perceived so strongly that it is cited to complete fragmentary figurines. MacCurdy writes of Brassempouy La poire (Figure 5.la, b, c) that, "This torso is so much like the figurines from Lespugue [Figure 5.1d], Willendorf [Figure 5.1e], and Grimaldi [Figure 5.1./], that one is justified in assuming for it a head without features, diminutive arms (or perhaps none at all) and feetless legs tapering to a point" (MacCurdy 1924: 260), thereby assuming that characteristics identified in other figurines can be uniformly applied to this fragmentary example. Similarly, Klima uses the Dolni Vestonice Venus I as a model on which to base his speculative reconstruction of a more recent and fragmentary discovery from the same site (Klima 1983: Fig. 2) (Figure 5.2a, b). However, with regard to the validity of the stylistic canon, it can be shown that in certain instances, adherence to this canon, and subsequent prioritisation of those features it promotes over individual characteristics, is allowed to influence the identification, interpretation and presentation of the images. This can lead to misleading and even inaccurate generalization. The work of Faris (1983) repeats and promotes the canon, perpetuating a number of established stereotypes. His reading of the Gravettian female sculptures stresses their representation "in a caricature of physiology and reproductive dimensions", with "some aspect of female physiology, usually in the fom1 of some attribute of reproduction" signified "in every case" (Faris 1983: 107). His assessment stresses that "the 131 most consptcuous features are specifically anatomical characteristics and exaggerated breasts and buttocks (Fig. 7.17) to the exclusion of any modelling of heads, anns, hands, or feet" (ibid: I 04). He sees this "distortion" repeated in the female figures in parietal sculpture (ibid: 104), and he illustrates four of the Laussel reliefs (only the Archer is not shown) (Figures 3.44-48), the La Magdeleine 'reclining' women (Figures 3.49/, g) and the Angles-sur-1' Anglin figures (Figure 3.49e) (ibid: 108-110 and Figs. 7.18, 7.19, 7.20). He later repeats that "there is a deliberate avoidance of individuation of heads or faces. Emphasis and elaboration is evident in ponderous breasts and in mid-body obesity (or pregnancy?)" (ibid: 106) There are several flaws in this presentation of the material, and inaccuracies in the claims made. The caption accompanying Faris' Fig. 7.17 mentions the wide distribution of the female images and repeats that the heads, arms and feet are "deliberately avoided", while there is "deliberate attention to mid-body obesity and ponderous breasts".