Museum Essay #1 - Celebration of Death

Throughout history and across the world, the ritualistic practices surrounding death have been and continue to be a huge part of each culture. Often the most fascinating, beautiful aspects to discover and explore of different peoples is the manner in which they commemorate, acknowledge and sometimes celebrate the dead. These rituals speak to the group they belong to. At the Met Museum, two pieces really exemplified a culture being display via their burial practices. Although these both have that utilization in common, there are all numerous ways in which they contrast.

My approach to this assignment was simple: let the "aesthetic emotion" guide then connect two pieces later. Among the pictures I took, there were some interesting pairings but I loved the comparisons that were immediately evident between these two in particular. The first obvious commonality is that both of these pieces are 3-dimensional sculptures that are extraordinary version of ordinary things. If they were to merely be practical, a simple box or even just a wrap would have sufficed in burying the deceased. Being ornate was clearly the goal with both of these pieces. As for the type of sculpture, the sarcophagus is a relief sculpture with carvings that were created on one continual flat surface around the case.  And although both are carved sculptures, the sarcophagus was made of marble and the Malagan work out of wood, paint and shell. Obviously, both would involve differing methods of craftsmanship.

Both pieces with actual texture also have noticeable value. Because the Greek sculpture was crafted from marble there is more contrast and therefore less value than the Northern New Ireland, Papua New Guinea sculpture that has more value due to the use of color in paint and the varying natural colors in the materials used. As for the shape, it can be argued that these both have organic and geometric shape. However, one type of shape is more dominate in each piece; the Malagan carving consist of more geometric shapes and has a lot of symmetry and patterns where as the Greek carving is made up of mainly organic human figures. Death is indeed the subject matter these two pieces share however they show it in distinct ways. The sarcophagus was originally made to house the body however the other was often created some time after the person was dead to commemorate the person’s life and accomplishments. Having said that, they both seem to be designed as celebratory pieces. Dionysus in Greek mythology is the god of grape harvest and wine. Wine being an element associated with celebration. The Malagan carving was used during ceremonies that celebrated the deceased. Perhaps the message of both is that death doesn’t have to exclusively be a sorrowful affair.

Based on the traditions of each of the regions, each are representational. Although the Greek piece also gives form to the unknown physicality of a god, it also depicts other mortal human beings in a representational way. Unfortunately, it wasn’t written whether or not the Malagan piece includes depictions of actual people.  Both too display animals in a representational way with the sarcophagus containing a carving of a panther and the wood and shell piece a carving of the head of a boar and fish. The realistic representations make all references recognizable. Based on other Greek depicts of the human form, it is clear that sculpture contains idealized human figures. Further proof of this is the fact that a god is portrayed. Of course a god would be portrayed not only based on the societal beliefs of said god but would also which the highest of the societal beauty standards. It is unclearly what the figures in the Malagan piece were modeled after but it was common for a rendering of the deceased to be in the piece. I find it reasonable to assume that the person would be depicted favorably using cultural symbolism. Perhaps the boar and fish represent wealth, stature, character or something along those lines. Otherwise, the person wouldn’t be worth commemorating.

Neither of these works have a known artist however both speak on the people from which they came.  To really observe each of these sculptures is to gain insight into these two cultures of vastly different regions and time periods. I believe they were chosen by the Met curator(s) not only due to the obvious masterfulness but also because of the exemplification of the artistry and aesthetics of the cultures each piece came from. One was sculpted in Papua New Guinea in the late 19^th-early 20^th century and the other in Ancient Greece between 220 and 230 A.D yet they share similarities. Overall, they are both stunning pieces created in response to our inevitable mortality.