Decoding the Meaning: the Four Art-Making Theories

I believe that theory three is the most convincing to me. Back 24,000 years ago, homo sapiens were
not conserned what movie they should see tomorrow. There main priority was survival. At the time
that they lived, the nature surrounding them was full of danger. Huge carnivores existed that could
kill anyone. To be able to survive in a world like that, homosapeins needed to know how to hunt and
how to hunt well or else they would have a hard time surviving. By using drawings, they could teach
and learn the correct techniques to use while hunting. By using these visual tools, humans exist
today. They could not teach people how to hunt because showing them could be life threatening if
they do not know the correct ways on how to hunt. I don't know of any other theories that could be
proposed. Any suggestions?

I think Nikki states a great point. Without art they might not have been able to watch out for danger. There are many ways the art can help show and teach them. LIke what to look for when out hunting. Or something like this animal is more dangerous. I think art helps show a new way of learning(well old way). Some people are visual learners, pictures are art can help teach. It a fun way for bolth the person dawing and learning. I dont have any everything you said, I think the same way.

Although Abby and Nikki you make great points, I'm not sure if using art to teach is the most convincing way that Homo Sapiens used art. Yes, people can draw pictures and teach through art, but you can't draw everything. Somethings are just too hard to be drawn and to be understood by someone else.
The most convincing theory for me would be theory two, which talks about sympathetic magic. Theory two talks about homo sapiens drawing animals that seemed weak, wounded or dead and also creating women figures that were pregnant. These we're probably made to create weaker animals while they hunted, and to create more pregnant women. They created these drawings to feel like they had power over something, something they could control. Knowing that they could control something probably made them feel more secure and safe. It also could make them feel more confident while hunting. Without that sense of control over something, they would feel intimidated and insecure.

i agree with nora. i think that art was primarily used to show honor towards animals of the hunt. i think that art was used for religious beliefs and sacrificial things than to teach. art was a huge part of the culture back then and so was hunting. the people would have most likely combined these too. examples of this are things such as cave drawings when people are honoring the animals they hunt.

I agree with Nora and Mary that Theory Two is most convincing because it gives a sense of control for the homo sapiens. They didn't always know whether they would have a good hunting trip or if they could get pregnant. The drawings or figures of women and animal kept them close to the spirit of the animal or fertility goddess. This kinda made them think they had control over the animals and pregnancy.

I agree with Nora, Victoria, and Mary. I feel theory two is the most convincing because not only do they show respect for the animals by painting them on their walls, they also do it in such a secluded area and a place so hard to reach that it is another sign of respect. It shows that they would cross treterus and dangerous places just so that they can respect an animal or human in the best way they can.

I think a combination of theories 2 and 4 is the most likely explanation. Shamanism, mainly the belief in spirit-animals, a powerful connection with nature, and the belief the use of totems or drawings to give power, was likely the very first religion, due to the fact that early Homo sapiens were excessively nature-dependant. It gave them life, and it took life away. the belief that you can gain power and find spirit-animals through art is a universal trait in all variations of the shamanistic religion.

I think that they used art for a all of those reasons. I think that it may have started as a way to "communicate" with the spirit world but then turned into more of something more like sympathetic magic and, after a while, it was also used as pleasure, although it is likely that it was used as a teaching tool at some point in time. They might have been trying to learn about the secrets spirit animals could tell them about the living species' habits and the best way to hunt them. They may also have been trying to learn about their afterlife and communicate with their ancestors. Through "communicating" with the spirits they may have learned the technique of sympathetic magic which they used to influence their prey and dominate them. After a while, the elderly and women that didn't play an important role in the band may have picked up the drawing techniques and drawn on the wall for pleasure in their spare time. As intelligence levels rose and hunters realized that to prevent others from dying, they needed to teach the young boys how to hunt so they probably used pictures to show them how to hunt certain animals correctly.

I have to say that Theory 4 is the most convincing to me. Cave art has been found mostly deep within caves. The areas in which the drawings are located are very difficult to reach because of dangerous natural obstacles of the caves. Because of this, I find it difficult to believe that people would go to such measures just to draw on the walls for pleasure or document hunting strategies. Why couldn't the people draw these things near the mouth of the cave where they lived? There must have been some sort of significance to what the people were drawing on the walls if they sacrificed so much to get to the site of the art. It makes sense that people would sacrifice a lot for religious purposes, such as communicating with a spirit-world. It is also said that for a shaman to communicate with the spirit world, they must be in a dark, silent, and isolated place. Deep within a cave is exactly this.
I cannot come up with another reason, though I believe that the purpose of the art must have had some sort of religious or very important meaning.

I agree with Melissa, theory four is the theory I think is most likely correct. It's possible the backs of these caves were special or sacred places that were reserved for special things such as these drawings, so that they were not easily attainable, and must be worked for to be seen, almost like a sacred chapel or shrine of some sort. It's possible these people thought that the spirits lived at the ends of the caves and they painted the drawings there for the spirits and no one else. It could be a lot of things.

In my opinion, theory two is the most convincing out of all of them. I agree with Nora. I think drawing could be used to communicate, but only to a certain extent. I think it would get confusing, because a drawing to one person can strike as a totally different thing to another.

Theory two gives the idea that making an image of something gives you power over that image. Early homo sapiens were hunter gatherers, so this concept would be pretty important to them They needed to be able to kill animals to feed their people, so they wanted to be stronger and more powerful than them. The images would build up their confidence, and because of that, they would probably do a better job of hunting. Not because the images possessed some sort of magic, but because they believed they did. In the packet, it also says that many sculptures of women have been found. The sculptures were most likely created so that women would become pregnant more and increase their population.

I think Theory 3 convinces me the most. Like we said in class, we thought of this handbook being a field guide that tells people information.
I like that idea of a handbook being related to a field guid because the knowledge that the artists had at that time can be past on to
generation to generation. With each generation, they have something to start with and may be even impove on. In the packet, it says
the art during this time could have been used as a teaching tool. I think could be ture. Some of the paintings show what was good to
hunt, what was bad to hunt, and how to trace animals. To me, it is like the cave painting is teaching you rather than a person teaching you.
Another theory I also found convincing is Theory 1. I think doing some type of art can be for pleasure. My counsin's wife is an artist and
she finds art not only a pleasure, but as a profession. Same with my cousin's sister, she is a musical person and she is trying to keep
the teaching of music in schools.Some artists can come up with strange ideas when they are experimenting not just for pleasure, but for
fun too. When I am bored or have nothing to do, art draws my attention and passes the time. It sound crazy, but if you are not interested
in your class you could end up doodling in your notebook to pass the time becasue you are so bored. Not all art has to do with drawing.
Many people listen to music or dance to music for fun and for pleasure. Everyone has a different look at art weather it is for pleasure or for
fun.

I agree with Theory two the most. The theory involves sympathetic magic and states that illustrating certain objects will give you the power of that object. Theory two consists of pictures of pregnant women, and weak or injured animals. I think this is convincing because these are things that are important to Homo sapiens. Pregnant women represent life. And as Sophie said, when women see the figures, they often may be encouraged to get pregnant so that they can increase the population. The images of weak animals most likely have to do with hunting. These pictures show humans how weak the animals can be, and it makes it easier for them to hunt these animals. Seeing the animal struggling may cause the humans to become more confident in their hunting skills. This is important because humans are hunter-gatherers, so they rely on the food they catch.

Theory 2 for me is definitely the most convincing. I believe that more than 3/4 of all art is derived from religious/spiritual belief. Some, such is the case for Paleolithic people, use images to express power. The Paleolithic people depict wounded or dying animals to show that homosapiens can conquer, and also as a sign sending a message to the people, saying that you can do anything you set your mind to, and you can conquer all that stands in your way. They also created sculptures of pregnant women to represent new life that never ceases to exist in humans. Both are signs of unending power and determination for all people.
Theory 3 is next, because the power they expressed comes at a price, which is explained here. The Paleolithic people drew in the animal images explained in Theory 2 prey that was dangerous, as well as prey that was wanted, per se. They needed instinct as to what animals to hunt and which ones will hunt them, and the drawings probably helped to provide just that information. Not only was art probably a spiritual statement, but sometimes is used as a mentor.
Theory 4 follows along with my explanation for Theory 2, making it quite convincing as well, however not as much to me as Theory 3. This is, once again, based on spirituality. Paleolithic people may have used the caves as a "portal" to the "spirit-world." They performed rituals, usually involving some acclaimed "spirit-animal." Shamans who interpret this kind of phenomena could believably connect to the spirit-animals, but while under certain influences such as sensory deprivation (as defined on the page) and hallucinogenic drugs. This is definitely a new way to look at art, as it is not something that usually comes to one's mind.
Theory 1 is by far the least convincing theory. All it mentioned was that Paleolithic people had a lot of free time, in which they use to create their art. All it represents is when they are able to create their art. It explains nothing as to what the art means to the people, what kind of message it sends, at all.

I am most interested in theory 4. Theory 4 is most convincing for me bacause none of the other theories provide an explanation as to why people went so far into caves to paint these pictures. In my class, we talked about the idea of going so far into the caves because the farther you go the closer to the animal you get. If these people wanted to create a field guide, a documentation of hunting stragegies, or they were only drawing for pleasure, why would they go to places that were almost not accessable? I think that it may have been a form of church or religion. The idea of making a journey deep into the cave to produce this art of animals suggests that they may have thought that animal spirits went deep into the caves. There is also a possibility that the people who drew the pictures did not want others to find them easily. Drawing them deep in a cave seems to make it sacred or special in some way. Maybe the people who drew the pictures did not EVER intend for people to see them, so they thought that by going deep into the cave people would never be able to find their drawings. There has got to be some sort of spiritual connection, it is the only possibility that makes sense to me.

I believe that the theory 3 was most effective with regards to teaching kids through a more visual way to art. Other big supporter of the thories is the imagination part of art. That includes drawing imaginary things or things like that. Something I believe that contradicts that is having that theory not talk about creatures involved in art including primates. I also believed that theory 1 was a little too broad and theory 4 was a little too detailed or involved.
In different points, I think that theory 2 was most convicing. I think this because I could easily picture in my head that people didi it for power and dominance over other socities.

I believe Theory 4 is most convincing. There were many more animal drawings than human-related drawings. This may mean that the Homo sapiens were trying to communicate with the animal spirits. The sensory deprivation of the caves may have made it seem possible to communicate with the spirit world many animals inhabited, as well. I believe it is important that the cave art is related to altered states from various societies in recent times. More recently the American Indian culture used much of the same mind altering ways to communicate with animals and nature. Another theory I would propose is Theory 3 because it appears to be a very simple and practical way of describing one of their basic needs of survival, which was hunting.

In my opinion theory four is the most logical explanation. I see what your saying Melissa on how most cave drawings were found deep within the caves and how this had to have a significant explanation. Religious practices and important sacrifices maybe took place in these areas. Since countless cave drawings were discovered further into the back caves then this must have been an important meeting place or ceremonies might have taken place. These people might have also believed that spirits were more comfortable in dark, silence, and isolation so their decision was to use their artistic talents and draw in these special places far away from other groups or communities.

As many students agree, I feel that Theory four is the most convincing. This theory shows that the homo sapiens went through a great deal of trouble in order to reach the places in which the cave-drawings were created. It would have been more practical for the society to use the mouth of the caves or places with easier access for drawings. Clearly, there was a specific reason and explanation for the locations of the drawings which were deep in the caves blocked by natural obstacles. Therefore, the drawings were most-likely not for pleasure or entertainment. They were probably for religious reasons and to communicate with the spirit world. Evidence to support this would be that it was believed in order to communicate with spirits, you/the drawings must be in a isolated, dark place. This is exactly where the cave-drawings were. Theory three also made sense by displaying how to hunt.

Why can't it be more than one theory is correct? It is clear that 4 is a good argument because of the special place where they were done and the amount of them overlapping. But who is to say it didn't start as a learning tool, and then progress into two branches: art for arts sake, and magic paintings. This would make sense because there are drawings that don't make sense for just one explanation. Such as the drawing of the mammoth with the spot to shot hi-lighted. That doesn't make sense for it to be religious or just art. It only really makes sense as an instruction. The sympathitic magic makes sense for the women carvings. And just plain art it logical for all the straight up pics of animals. I think it is very possible that many if not all 4 branches of thinking are correct.

I believe that all the theories are plausable, but the most convincing for me was the fourth theory. If they went to the deepest, darkest place in the cave and had to go through many obstacles, why would it be for teaching purposes alone? I think that they must have done it for spiritual reasons because they not only go through a lot of difficult obstacles to get there, but they also proceeded to climb the wall of the cave! To do all of this just to teach their people which animals are for hunting and how to kill those animals, seems unrealistic. For that same reason, I also do not think it was because they were just bored. So, it must have spiritual meaning because there doesn't seem to be any other explanations for their actions! I also like what Mia said about there possibly being ceremonies or meetings taking place there. It makes sense because it seems like such an important place if the people are willing to risk their lives to get there.

I agree most with theory 4. Homo sapiens didn't just believe in what they say in front of their eyes. They thought more about the spiritual world, more than other creatures would. When they are under the influence of sensory deprivation, they start thinking about the spiritual world and what more could be out there. They start drawing out their thoughts: what they see, what they hear, how they feel, etc. I agree with all theories, but theory 4 is the most believable for me.

I agree with claire. I believe homo sapiens believed that there was more to life than just them. It obviously meant something to them or they would just place the paintings were it was most convenient. Also, there is other evidence that they believed in something other then themselves by different symbolic rituals. Like placement of bodies and such.