Without keen observation, it is difficult to compare several works of art. According to Minkov (1), people explain what they see and talk about the influences of these works. People with low perception abilities are unable to make sound decisions on visual art. This paper contains two pieces of art: the Temple of Hera I and the Temple of Poseidon, followed by Akropolis and the Temple of Athena Nike. The Temples of Hera I and II are Greek holy icons that stand on the slopes of Krios Hills (Vickatou 2012). Akropolis is a temple dedicated to Athena and used for significant religious festivities. The similarity of these two arts is the origin, which are religious backgrounds and old time buildings. From their visual views, the designs appeared almost similar to each other, like structural reinforcements to make them strong.
Iconographic qualities, which refer to the visual elements used to make an illustration assist in distinguishing different artworks at various times. Temple of Hera I and II cover a large area of land, extending more on their lengths than widths (Vickatou 2012). The distance between the two temples is a space, a probable indication that the two served different people in that time. One of the Temples has an extension above it, which in the current time would support a roof as the other one lacks the extension. Even though these structural differences existed, the two had an almost similar deign on the walls, showing supporting pillar.
The second work, Akropolis had more buildings and structures around it, spreading from the foreground to the background. Additional structures are on the site, together with walls that one must pass before reaching the main temple. In spite of these, the temple remains at an elevated point that viewers cannot miss seeing (Venieri 2012). Roofing was not a complete thing in that error, as light appears to be getting in on the top.
The main differences between the two structures are the building system that did not leave more space in the second one. More fencing, protection, elevation and congestion were in the second work compared to the first one (Venieri 2012). Additionally, the Temple of Hera I and II have more space between them. Space allows one to distinguish between the Building style and structures, as in the two cases where Akropolis shows more structures. The attention of a viewer suffers from many objects around it and fails to decipher the exact information.
Comparing different works of art changes the conceptions people have of them and brings new ideas to the viewers. The various artworks here are temples in the old days in Greek and Italy. People may need to understand the religious setting in the times, types of buildings, and the architectural knowledge among others (MacDonald 2). Though these pieces of work appeared different, they are of a religious origin, showing the different ways that societies did their job. A little similarity like making the work’s complex brings out the beautiful image of old time designers and builders (Minkov 1). It is worthy to notice that the works of art presented here are not to indicate the superiority of each builder or design but the idea of these works. In conclusion, artists should bring in the ideas of comparison in their sound mind and observation.
MacDonald, Fiona. I Wonder Why Greeks Built Temples: and Other Questions about Ancient Greece. Kingfisher, 2012.
Minkov, Michael. Cross-Cultural Analysis: The Science and Art of Comparing the World’s Modern Societies and Their Cultures. Sage, 2012.
Venieri, Iona. “Acropolis of Athens.” Archaeological sites, Ministry of culture, 2012, odysseus.culture.gr/h/3/eh351.jsp?obj_id=2384. Accessed 23 Feb. 2017.
Vickatou, Olympia. “Temple of Hera at Olympia.” Archaeological sites, Ministry of Culture, 2012, odysseus.culture.gr/h/2/eh251.jsp?obj_id=493. Accessed 23 Feb. 2017.