Classic Statues

[John Galaor]

I suppose all of us has seen some pictures of classical statues, some from Ancient Greece but most from Renaissance artists.

The question is, the diminutive size the genitals on the male statues have any meaning either conscious or unconscious?

[Nephylim]

Hmmm... My suggestion would be that it is simply the fasion of the artists at the time... like the women with long crinkly hair in Pre Raphaelite or the fat ladies of the Rennaisance or the cubists or whatever

 

The Dying Gaul

 

He's not so small considering he's soft

[Former Member]

I think Nephy's right, it's probably a fashion thing. Plus, maybe the artists wanted the viewers to focus on the statues as a whole (pose, meaning, etc.)? Maybe they thought that by giving the statues smaller genitals, they would also take their viewers' attention away from those.

 

But honestly, I have no idea. Good question

[BeysJoshersLepton V2]

As far as I am aware it was cultural leanings influancing the art fashion of the time, large penises were meant to be comical rather something to be displayed on a statue. From a concious or unconcious point of view, I imagine it could of been done to ensure the males of the time did not feel of a smaller stature compared to a work of art.

[TetRefine]

Funny you ask this cause I was wondering the same thing. I decided to do some research on this, and I found this out about the Greeks. The male body in Greece was idolized, and small, uncircumcised penises were portrayed as ideal. They saw large, circumcised penises as something only the barbaric Africans or Arabs/Persians had, and they viewed these people as beneath them. Hence why the junk on Greek statues are so small.

[Mark Arbour]

I always attributed their small size to the fact that there was no central heating.

[John Galaor]

Funny you ask this cause I was wondering the same thing. I decided to do some research on this, and I found this out about the Greeks. The male body in Greece was idolized, and small, uncircumcised penises were portrayed as ideal. They saw large, circumcised penises as something only the barbaric Africans or Arabs/Persians had, and they viewed these people as beneath them. Hence why the junk on Greek statues are so small.

 

It seems a good idea. There was an exception on this concept. If not in statues they made a number of drawings in ceramic of satyrs and the Greek convention at this time was to paint the satyrs with a great erect phalluses. The myths also told the satyrs had a supernatural lust. There is some ceramics in museums with erotic drawings where are shown people with "indecent" phallus like they were satyrs. It seems to me it was like a sort of pornographic industry that sold well. For the Greeks exported painted ceramics, and ceramic with draws all around the Mediterranean and Black sea.

The ceramics were also used as instruments of politics to make propaganda of some young candidates. Those ceramics used to say repeated in plates, legends like "so and so is kalos"; so and so is cute. But the word kalos had also some wide meaning like admirable young fellow, fine, beautiful, noble, good.

In the period of the democracy in Athens enters in crisis the love among young men. For it get in collision the aristocratic candidates with the populars. And homo-eroticism was most an aristocratic custom than a popular one. Some young lover of an aristocrat could get some importance in the fights of politics, and the populars accused this or that lover that had rose high in government of being a slut, a prostitute. This was a nasty accusation. Then it comes the decadence of male love. It helped also the greater amount of wealth that had brought into the picture the figure of the slave boy used as prostitute. This figure was so common, that it was giving a lot bad name to the traditional male lovers. Most times was a sort of marriages between different social classes. An aristocrat as "erastés", older lover, and a boy of poor class as "erómeno".

 

Coming back to the main topic, the general the conventions in literature and statues was rather prudish. If you read Plato, the Symposium, or Phaedrus you will see how prudish they were. They were speaking of love, but you had to imagine what was this love made of. There is not any verbal hint about what happened. It was not like in the ceramic drawings.

 

If you read the Erotes, of Lucian of Samosata, that is a little more libertine, with a daring tittle that reads "A Dioalogue Comparing Male and Female Love", you can see how much they dared. It was not much, really. There is not any explicit comment of the did. That means, even in the "erotes", the author was using obviously some form of censure. We are talking of the 4the century AD.

The book is considered "not the work" of Lucian of Samosata. It is a book of the fourth century that imitates Lucian style of 'ridendo dicere verum,' 'laughingly to say the truth.'

 

Other less known concept was the Hermes' pillars. The were not more hand three or four feet high and showed an erect phallus, with bearded head over it. You can watch it here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermes

About the middle of the page is a photo of an archaic Greet "herm". The foot of the pic says, Archaic Greek herm, presumably of Hermes, unusual in that the penis has survived. Most of the herma recovered appears with the phallus mutilated, perhaps in the frenzy of destroying all the pagan idols of the Greeks.

[Cyhort]

Funny you ask this cause I was wondering the same thing. I decided to do some research on this, and I found this out about the Greeks. The male body in Greece was idolized, and small, uncircumcised penises were portrayed as ideal. They saw large, circumcised penises as something only the barbaric Africans or Arabs/Persians had, and they viewed these people as beneath them. Hence why the junk on Greek statues are so small.

 

Wow, talk about a size complex You'd think a culture so into bisexuality would appreciate a big penis lol

[JamesSavik]

Consider too- that many of the models for these statues were young teens (11-15).

 

Michaelangelo's David by bone structure, proportion and anatomy could have been no older than 16.

[John Galaor]

Wow, talk about a size complex You'd think a culture so into bisexuality would appreciate a big penis lol

 

Perhaps we should discern between the prudishness of the Greeks, in their educated manners, and the real stuff. It is a question for debate, for those with a little member cannot be proud of it. Then, it is easy to imagine, or to deduce, that the size of the phallus was a sign of greater maleness. Not necessarily true, but a handy theory. Anyway, in the porno trade all the stars are well endowed males. Also in many stories in nifty this fetish of big sizes appears more often than not.

[John Galaor]

Consider too- that many of the models for these statues were young teens (11-15).

 

Michaelangelo's David by bone structure, proportion and anatomy could have been no older than 16.

 

well, perhaps, you had made a point. My problem is that I have not experience of watching athletes of 16 years of age.

If the athletes of 16 are on average as burly as the David of Michelangelo statue shows, then you are right.

 

To me, this male looks like a stud of twenty four or twenty five years, not an adolescent at all.