Exposé PhD Project: Countercultures in Classical Athens

EXPOSÉ PHD PROJECT

Countercultures in Classical Athens

Body Images and their Depictions as Media of intramural negotiation processes (Working

Title)

Hein, Jennifer

01.09.2013

JENNIFER HEIN - Doctoral Program „Figuration ‚Counterculture‘ FSP Cultural Encounters – Cultural Conflicts – University of Innsbruck – Innrain 52 A-6020 Innsbruck. Email: [email protected]

Exposé PhD project: Countercultures in Classical Athens: Body images and their depictions as media in intramural negotiation processes (Working title) Jennifer Hein, University of Innsbruck October 2013

1

Contents

Abstract 2

Research interest 2

Theoretical foundations of the analysis 2

Source Material and Methodology 3

The Body as examination object 4

What is the concept of countercultures about?1 5

Limits and relevance of this project 5

Cited works 6

Selected works 7


2

Abstract

The main aim of this dissertation is to provide a new descriptive, as well as an explanatory model, for

stylistic change in statuary and pottery during the late archaic and classical period in Athens. How

can stylistic change in Greek ‘art’ during the late sixth and entire fifth century in Athens be

understood and explained? The research will be focussed on depictions of the human male body in

material and written culture while examining each genre and sub-genre according to their own set of

rules. This project challenges long-lasting notions of linear and teleological development in Greek

‘art’ and replacing it with an approach emphasising the impact of context as well as the involved

agents’ interests. The theoretical and methodological tools are, amongst others, the concept of

countercultures which explains change as the result of intramural negotiation processes between

different groups of interest. The production of material and written sources are understood as

following rules specific for each genre and the product as essential part of societal communication.

The result of the gathered information will be synthesised to generate a model of changes of body

images and how their depictions were negotiated.

Research interest

The research for my PhD dissertation will focus on changes in body images and in the way human

males bodies have been depicted throughout late archaic and classical times with special regard to

Athens.2 I am interested in the reasons for changes in the depiction of the human male body and

how the intrinsic rules of each genre either encouraged or inhibited change. The source material will

consist of both material as well as written culture. The focus on Athens is, on the one hand, due to its

dominance in research history as well as teaching. A re-evaluation of the assumptions on which

previous research has been based is long overdue since other research fields, e.g. sociology, offer

approaches to societal mechanisms and the production of material culture which seems worthwhile

to be considered.3 The concept of countercultures offers a new perspective on societal change

throughout human history while focussing not only on the context in which change occurs, but also

on the involved agents who struggle to establish their ideas of how their society or (more specifically)

particular fields are supposed to function.4 Artefacts and written sources are seen as manifestations

of the negotiation process between different groups of interests since they have been a potent

medium for intramural communication. On the other hand, Athens is the polis which, due to its

2 Since the body of source material has to be limited for this kind of research it will be necessary to focus on

depictions of male bodies produced in Attica. For further research the development of the depiction of female bodies may be of interested and inform us more about societal negotiation processes. The period investigated will be limited to the years between approx.. 520 and 404 B.C.E. 3 For instance Bourdieu’s field theory and Agent-Network-Theory by Latour.

4 Following Bourdieu’s field theory. See BOURDIEU 1984. 1993. 2007.


3

exceptional character, provides us with a unique set of source material which is a necessary

requirement for this kind of research endeavour.

Theoretical foundations of the analysis

Challenging traditional approaches and assumptions the issue of stylistic change is understood as:

the manifestation of a negotiation process based upon countercultural actions between ancient

agents struggling to establish their notion of how the human male body should be depicted. Based

on a strong criticism of the application of the term ‘art’ on ancient objects and the notion of them

being social agents and part of an Actor-network the studied artefacts are being understood as

means of communication within the particular society.5

Using the concept of counterculture the analysis is focused on agents with their interests as well on

the context in which they are negotiating. Changes in style and form language is not being seen as

stages of ‘goal-directed’ development, but as both means and result of intramural negotiation

processes which have to answer specific needs of the ancient agents. The reason why certain

changes occurred and the prevalence of certain forms are their ability to exploit the specific context

in which they are produced and discussed. These developments – in style of biological evolution –

are understood as being strongly contextual and societies as well as ideas (or memes6) are being

seen as in a constant process of adaptation and emergence.7

Source Material and Methodology

The analysed source material is roughly divided into written and material culture which are

concerned – either explicitly or implicitly – with the male body. Both types of evidence require

specific methodology. Following Osborn and Small’s criticism on the relationship between material

and written sources in which one has a supplementary function to the other, the different genres of

source material are not only categorised by their superficial material properties, e.g. written or

material evidence, but by the context of production, use and the handling agents.8 This method is

supported by Bourdieu’s field theory which is enhanced by the addition of objects and their

properties. 9 This means that each genre is described by their processes of production,

commissioners, function and context in order to extract the information it can offer without

‘contaminating’ it with the expectations based on the insights gained from other genres. Another

major issue is the application of modern ideas upon ancient societies because it is hazardous as we

5 GELL 1995. LATOUR 2005. BELLINGER 2006. WHITELY 2012. HODDER 2012.

6 GATHERER 1998. BLACKMORE 2000. DAWKINS 2006. PAULL 2009.

7 WHITEHEAD 2011.

8 OSBORNE 2011. SMALL 1999.

9 BOURDIEU 2007.


4

tend to contaminate them with expectations resulting from our own experience.10 The aim of this

methodology is to ascertain both scope and liberty in expressing alternatives of each genre. This

information will be necessary in determining the genres which were most likely to develop new body

images. The genres which will be examined are the following:

Material Culture Written Sources

Monumental Statuary – Marble Pre-Socratic Authors (e.g. Heraclitus)

Monumental Statuary – Bronze Epic (e.g. Homer)

Bronze figurines Poetry (e.g. Pindar)

Terracotta figurines Ostraka

Vase paintings (red and black figured) Comedy (e.g. Aristophanes)

Funeral Monuments Forensic Speech/Funeral Orations

To track the perception of ancient objects as well as written sources will be an integral part of my

methodology, since the reactions of different groups to the manifested counterconcepts is essential

to the understanding of the interaction of the concerned groups of interests for the analysis of

counterculture. In this regard it will be necessary to enhance our understanding of ancient

perception by adding information extracted from written culture. After all, Classical Archaeology is in

the fortunate position to have access to contemporary written sources which help us understand

ancient mentalities better. It is nonetheless essential to consider the rules which the producers and

users followed in the making and handling of the particular material. Self-awareness on the side of

the researchers in regard to their assumptions is also most important. This analysis thus has to stick

closely to the actual evidence while there is always a lingering danger of drifting into speculation.

This methodology has to be balanced between the extremes of ‘not being able to tell anything’ and

‘speculation’.

The Body as examination object

The depiction of the human male body is the central aspect of the analysis conducted in this project,

hence it is essential to account for the variety of body images which existed in ancient Greece.

Referring to the methodology as outlined above some caution must be exercised. It is imperative not

to confuse our modern notions of bodies and anatomy with those of ancient societies.11 What

ancient agents thought how the human body worked differs significantly from our modern

10

See SMALL 1999. KISTLER 2004. OSBORNE 2011. 11

OSBORNE 2011.


5

understanding which is strongly influenced by medicine and anatomic studies.12 Additionally, the

logic, peer group and texture of each genre render certain forms possible and others impossible. It

will, therefore, be interesting to observe how the body is depicted and when changes occur in each

genre. It will then be necessary to ask which conditions – either based on the characteristics of the

‘material’ or based on the peer group – are responsible for similarities and differences among the

examined genres.

From the late archaic period to the end of the fifth century depictions of the human male body in the

different genres have gone through some changes. As the most severe changes may be regarded the

introduction of the contrapposto, the establishment of the ideal in the middle of the fifth century

and the departure from said ideal towards the end of the century. In this project parallel and time-

displaced developments in the different genres will be observed and the relation between these

developments examined.

What is the concept of countercultures about?13

The analytical concept of countercultures provides a new perspective on change of entire societies as

well as particular parts of societies. Changes are the result of a complex negotiation process between

different groups of interests which all struggle to obtain the power to determine the rules either of

the entire society of a particular aspect, e.g. aesthetics, politics or religion. This concept focusses on

agents within this negotiation process and their means to communicate not only their criticism, but

also to propose an alternative to the status quo. The criticism, which often takes form of conflict, and

the intention to change the status quo according to their ‘counterconcept’ (alternative plan) are the

main characteristics of countercultural groups. This rather vague definition differentiates

countercultural groups from subcultures and parallel societies.

Since countercultures constitute themselves based on their criticism on the establishment the latter

plays an essential part in the analysis of these negotiation processes. In order to remain stable the

establishment – again, that of the entire society or of a specific aspect – has to adapt to this criticism

by either incorporating (parts of) the counterconcept or by developing their own mechanisms to

demolish any grounds for criticism. Thus, these different groups of interest are in a constant adaptive

process of producing criticism and answers and reacting to the opponent’s actions and reactions.

Limits and relevance of this project

The limits of this project are given by the relative scarcity of source material, as well as their

ambiguity, in regard to interpretation and dating. It is impossible to identify groups that called

12

RAPPE 1998. 13

This description of the term counterculture refers to YINGER 1960. 1977 but refines his definition.


6

themselves ‘counterculture’ or even understood themselves as acting in a countercultural way.

Hence, it is important to stress that we are dealing with a purely analytical concept which helps us to

interpret the evidence we have according to the concept of counterculture and (by doing so)

provides an insight on societal negotiation processes that would otherwise remain hidden.

The issue of stylistic change has played a central role in the occupation with Greek statuary since the

early days of Classical Archaeology, namely since J.J. Winckelmann’s ‘History of Greek Art’ (1764).

One of the major arguments – whether expressed implicitly or explicitly – is that of a development

from abstract to naturalistic forms. The proposed engines for this development varied from

individual/ethnic genius to the sole influence of socio-political and economic circumstances.14 A

major issue may be the notion of material culture as ‘art’ which limits its possibilities of interaction

with ancient agents.15 Since Classical Archaeology is a field of study that is based on these long-

lasting assumptions and has often refused to incorporate theory, this project will not only challenge

old traditions but also offer a theory which is adapted to the particular kind of source material and to

the research question. New answers to old questions will be sought in order to gain a new

understanding of how societies in ancient periods worked and remained ‘stable’ for a long time. As it

is important for societies to adapt to the new circumstances, as important is it for archaeological

sciences. Old ideas have to be challenged in order to update our view of ancient societies as well as

of our own, since both are irreversibly entangled with each other.

Cited works:

BELLINGER, A./KRIEGER, D. 2006. ANThology. Einführendes Handbuch zur Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie.

Berlin: Transcript Verlag

BLACKMORE, S. 1999. Die Macht der Meme: oder die Evolution von Kultur und Geist. Heidelberg:

Spektrum Akademischer Verlag

BOURDIEU, P. 2007. Field of Power, Literary Field and Habitus. In: S. During (Ed.): Cultural Studies

Reader. 3rd Edition. Oxon and New York: Routledge. S. 88-98.

BOURDIEU, P. 1984. Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge

BOURDIEU, P. 1993. The Field of Cultural Production. Cambridge: Polity Press

14

HALLETT 1986. BOARDMAN 1987. CHILD 1988. LEIBUNDGUT 1991. 15

WHITELY 2012.


7

DAWKINS, R. 2006. The Selfish Gene. 30th Anniversary Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press

GATHERER, D. 1998. Why the Thought Contagion Metaphor is Retarding the Progress of Memetics.

Journal of Memetics – Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission 2.2. S. 135-158

GELL, A. 1998. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press

HALLETT, C.H 1986. The Origins of the Classical Style in Sculpture. Journal of Hellenic Studies 106, S.

71–84.

KISTLER, E. 2004. 'Kampf der Mentalitäten': Ian Morris' 'Elitist-' versus 'Middling-Ideology'?. In R.

Rollinger – Chr. Ulf (Ed.): Griechische Archaik. Interne Entwicklungen – Externe Impulse.

Berlin: Akademie Verlag. S. 145-175

LATOUR, B. 2005. Reassembling the social – An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford

University Press

LEIBUNDGUT, A. 1989 Künstlerische Form und konservative Tendenzen nach Perikles.

Ein Stilpluralismus im 5. Jahrhundert v. Chr.? Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern.

OSBORNE, R. 2012. The History written on the ancient Greek body. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press

PAULL, J. 2009. Meme Maps: A Tool for Configuring Memes in Time and Space. European Journal of

Scientific Research 31.1. S. 11-18.

SMALL, D.B. 1999. The Tyranny of the Text: lost social strategies in current historical period

archaeology and in classical Mediterranean. In: P.P.A. Funari – M. Hall – S. Jones (Eds.):

Historical Archaeology: Back from the edge. London, New York: Routlegde. S. 122-136

WHITEHEAD, L. 2011. Enlivening the Concept of Democratization: The Biological Metaphor.

Perspectives on Politics 9.2. S. 291-299.

WHITLEY, J. 2012. Agency in Greek Art. In: T. J. Smith und D. Plantzos (Eds.): A companion to Greek

Art. Oxford, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell (Blackwell companions to the ancient world).

YINGER, M. R. 1960. Contraculture and Subculture. American Sociological Review 25 (5), S. 625–635.

YINGER, M. R. 1977. Countercultures and social change. American Sociological Review 42 (6), S. 833–

853.


8

Selected works:

APPADURAI, A. (Ed.) 1986. The social life of things. Commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

BARTELS, H. 1995. Menschen in Figurationen. Ein Lesebuch zur Einführung in die Prozeß- und

Figurationssoziologie von Norbert Elias. Opladen: Leske und Budrich.

BINTLIFF, J. 2012. Are there alternatives to the 'Red-Figure Vase People'? Identity, multi-ethnicity and

migration in Ancient Greece. In: G. Cifani and S.Stoddart (Eds.): Landscape, Ethnicity and

Identity in the archaic mediterranaen area. Oxford: Oxfordbooks, S. 51–63.

BOARDMAN, J. 1991. Rotfigurige Vasen aus Athen. Die Klassische Zeit. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp

von Zabern (Kulturgeschichte der Antiken Welt, 48).

BOEDEKER, D./RAAFLAUB, K.A. (Eds.) 1998. Democracy, Empire, and the Arts in Fifth-Century Athens.

Cambridge, MA, London: Harvard University Press.

BRAHMS, T. 1993. Archaismus. Untersuchungen zu Funktion und Bedeutung archaistischer Kunst in

der Klassik und im Hellenisms. Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Wien: Peter Lang.

BROCK, R./Hodkins, S. (Eds.) 2000. Alternatives to Athens. Varieties of Political Organization and

Community in Ancient Greece. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

COHEN, B. (Ed.) 2000. Not the Classical Ideal. Athens and the Construction of the Other in Greek Art.

Leiden: Brill.

COSER, L. A. 1972. The Functions of Social Conflict. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.

CRAWLEY QUINN, J. 2007. Herms, Kouroi and the political anatomy of Athens. Greece & Rome 54 (1),

S. 82–105.

FEHR, B. 1984. Die Tyrannentöter oder: Kann man der Demokratie ein Denkmal setzen? Frankfurt am

Main: Fischer-Taschenbuch-Verlag.

FEHR, B. 2011. Becoming Good Democrats and Wives. Civic Education and Femal Socialization on the

Parthenon Frieze. Sonderband. Zürich, Berlin: LIT Verlag (Hephaistos).

FELTEN, F. 1988. Archaische arkadische Bronzestatuetten. In: K. Gschwantler – A. Bernhard-Wachler

(Eds.): Griechische und römische Statuetten und Großbronzen: Akten der 9. Internationalen

Tagung über antike Bronzen. Wien, 21.-25. April 1986. Wien: Kunsthistorisches

Museum Wien, S. 237–243.


9

HEINEMANN, A. 2009. Ungleiche Festgenossen. Spätarchaische Gelagegemeinschaften im Medium

der Vasenmalerei. In: C. Mann – M. Haake – R. von den Hoff (Eds.): Rollenbilder in der

athenischen Demokratie. Medien, Gruppen, Räume im politischen und sozialen System.

Beiträge zu einem interdisziplinären Kolloquium in Freiburg i.Br., 24.-25. November 2006.

Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, S. 35–70.

HODDER, I. 2011. Human-thing entanglement. towards an integrated archaeological perspective.

Journal of the Royal Anthropological Insitute 17, S. 154–177.

HÖLSCHER, T. 2012. Menschenbilder in der altgriechischen Kunst. In: M. Hilgert – Mi. Wink (Eds.):

Menschen-Bilder. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, S. 27–47.

JUNKER, K. 1991. Bildhauer und Vasenmaler im spätarchaischen Athen. In: Staatliche Museen zu

Berlin (Ed.): Euphronios und seine Zeit. Kolloquium Berlin 1991. Berlin, S. 120–131.

KURKE, L. 1999. Coins, Bodies, Games, and Gold. The Politics of Meaning in Archaic Greece. Princeton,

New Jersey: Princetone University Press.

Morris, I. (Ed.) 1994. Classical Greece. Ancient historians and modern archaeologists. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

RAPPE, G. 1995. Archaische Leiberfahrungen. der Leib in der frühgriechischen Philosophie und in

außereuropäischen Kulturen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag (Lykneus Studien zur Neuen

Phänomenologie, 2).

SCHWEIZER, B. 2006. Harmodios und Aristogeiton. Die sog. Tyrannenmörder im 5. Jh. v. Chr. In: N.

Kreutz – B. Schweizer (Eds.): TEKMERIA. Archäologische Zeugnisse in ihrer kulturhistorischen

politischen Dimension. Paderborn: Bonifatius, S. 291–313.

SMITH, R.R.R. 2007. Pindar, Athletes, and the Early Greek Statue Habit. In: S. Hornblower – C. Morgan

(Eds.): Pindar's Poetry, Patrons, and festivals. from Archaic Greece to the Roman Empire.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, S. 83–139.

STÄHLI, A. 1999. Begehrenswerte Körper. Die ersten Männerstatuen der griechischen Antike. In: J.

Funk – C. Brück (Eds.): Körper-Konzepte. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag (Literatur und

Anthropologie, 5), S. 83–110.

Exposé PhD Project: Countercultures in Classical Athens

Documents

Transcript of Exposé PhD Project: Countercultures in Classical Athens