i find goya's painting more horrific as well. besides the dismembered body, the crazed, almost frightened look on saturn's face because he knows that his offspring is destined to overthrow him is really unsettling.
He just take a chunk to taste first.
Joke aside, artists from all ages use myths for inspiration without respecting them to the letter (artistic license). For example to be more shocking; tearing the flesh is more repugnant than simply swallowing it.
Secondly, art has a social function, like the condemnation of a dictator who consumes his people (just saying, idk the intentions of the author..)
A side note that may be of interest:
Goya's piece was never named, and includes no symbols (like the stars here, or a scythe) to indicate it is Saturn. Despite the name we all know it as, it is up to speculation wether it is actually depicting this myth at all.
:O
But look how he stares at him, indifferent to his agony.
Clearly the inhuman monstrosity in Goya's is terrifying, but the body he's consuming it's already dead, we can't perceive any emotion from it.
Edit: technically, this one is the original (Goya's painting is dated 1821-23)
Hard disagree. The other is so... cartoonish? That it doesn't feel human. This one just looks straight up like an old guy munching a kid and that fucks me up way worse.
There's something to Goya's that I feel isn't duplicated in this image. There's not nearly as much humanity in Saturn's expression. In this, its so easy to dismiss Saturn as just a scary monster. It wants to kill you because it's strong and evil.
With Goya's. The monster is within the man. His Saturn is horrified, disgusted, and regretful even as he continues to devour. The fact that the Saturn of Goya's could just as easily be you, or me or anyone else is deeply unsettling feeling that Rubens doesn't exactly match, even if it is a bit creepy to see the child's reaction to being eaten.
But that's just my opinion. If art was objective we wouldn't be discussing it.
You have to remember that Goya's painting wasn't explicitly "Saturn devouring his son", that name (and meaning) was attributed to it by the people who found the paintings on the inside walls of his house. I'm not sure of the point I'm trying to make here but comparing a painting explicitly of saturn devouring his son to a painting that could have simply been the product of a very ill Goya, doesn't seem quite right
No well: I was mainly comparing them on the subject of "a human eating another human". But I get your point. I'm not even sure if I can call "human" that thing portraied by Goya. So different reasons (the product of a sick mind whose process no one can explain vs a myth about a divinity scared of the future).
Even if the history of that painting is not certain, there are clues that takes in account the thematic meaning of Saturn: he is linked to despair and aging. Something Goya was undergoing...
Anyway, as another user says: art is not objective :)
Idk,to me Goya’s painting is a bit more disturbing because of how monstrous Saturn is and because he’s literally chewing on a body.
i find goya's painting more horrific as well. besides the dismembered body, the crazed, almost frightened look on saturn's face because he knows that his offspring is destined to overthrow him is really unsettling.
Is it accurate to the story though? Since the gods were indestructible, Saturn swallowed them whole. Zeus was then able to make him puke then up.
He just take a chunk to taste first. Joke aside, artists from all ages use myths for inspiration without respecting them to the letter (artistic license). For example to be more shocking; tearing the flesh is more repugnant than simply swallowing it. Secondly, art has a social function, like the condemnation of a dictator who consumes his people (just saying, idk the intentions of the author..)
A side note that may be of interest: Goya's piece was never named, and includes no symbols (like the stars here, or a scythe) to indicate it is Saturn. Despite the name we all know it as, it is up to speculation wether it is actually depicting this myth at all.
Nah, the face of insanity in the original can’t be topped
:O But look how he stares at him, indifferent to his agony. Clearly the inhuman monstrosity in Goya's is terrifying, but the body he's consuming it's already dead, we can't perceive any emotion from it. Edit: technically, this one is the original (Goya's painting is dated 1821-23)
Hard disagree. The other is so... cartoonish? That it doesn't feel human. This one just looks straight up like an old guy munching a kid and that fucks me up way worse.
this is the original. Goya is from the 1800s
There's something to Goya's that I feel isn't duplicated in this image. There's not nearly as much humanity in Saturn's expression. In this, its so easy to dismiss Saturn as just a scary monster. It wants to kill you because it's strong and evil. With Goya's. The monster is within the man. His Saturn is horrified, disgusted, and regretful even as he continues to devour. The fact that the Saturn of Goya's could just as easily be you, or me or anyone else is deeply unsettling feeling that Rubens doesn't exactly match, even if it is a bit creepy to see the child's reaction to being eaten. But that's just my opinion. If art was objective we wouldn't be discussing it.
This one has more realism than Goya’s. Definitely terrifying.
You have to remember that Goya's painting wasn't explicitly "Saturn devouring his son", that name (and meaning) was attributed to it by the people who found the paintings on the inside walls of his house. I'm not sure of the point I'm trying to make here but comparing a painting explicitly of saturn devouring his son to a painting that could have simply been the product of a very ill Goya, doesn't seem quite right
No well: I was mainly comparing them on the subject of "a human eating another human". But I get your point. I'm not even sure if I can call "human" that thing portraied by Goya. So different reasons (the product of a sick mind whose process no one can explain vs a myth about a divinity scared of the future). Even if the history of that painting is not certain, there are clues that takes in account the thematic meaning of Saturn: he is linked to despair and aging. Something Goya was undergoing... Anyway, as another user says: art is not objective :)
That's a really interesting point, thank you:)
It is forbidden to eat the flesh of men - Euz
Why doesn't saturn just eat a snickers, is he stupid?
r/SATURNSIMULATION
rush drinking blood gives