"Parietal art"

Ego (ego@club-internet.fr)
11 Jan 1997 23:44:36 GMT


I'm a french student just beginning a philosophy thesis on what we call
"parietal art" (I don't know if this is an intercontinental expression),
which means paleolitical and european paintings. This includes among 50
archeological sites from Perigord (Lascaux, Rouffignac, Font-de-Gaume, la
Madeleine...) to Spain ("Monts Cantabriques": Altamira, Pindal, El Pendo,
Monte Castillo...).
I examine the esthetic importance of the "parietal art", and refuse any
kind of relation with any other kind of artistics objects such as sculpture
or "stone-art" (work on stone to produce tools). I'm not a paleontologist
or an historian, but a philosopher. And my problem is not to produce an
theory on art evolution, or to make evident some metaphysicals questions on
mankind and his esthetics origins. Considered from the metaphysical point
of view, "parietal art" is very common. It certainly has a religious basis,
in its meaning and fonction. But its form is so complex... There is a
structure in "parietal art" which includes links between animal figures
(bull-horse as a "leitmotiv", some other animals as goats as a "pattern"),
and between animal figures and signs( large and ovals or linear). Those
links certainly represent the key of the prehistorical man psychology. This
man had to built a civilisation. It was a necessity. The only way of
surviving was society, and the result of this necessity and this society is
certainly that form of art. As soon as we talk of civilisation, of a
civilisation work, we have to talk of esthetic. Human being can't civilize
or get civilized without an idea, some values: a form. This is the all
problem of my studies.

I would be very interested in any discussion about it...