Ernst Kitzinger Essay

Ernst Kitzinger finds the way the artist characterizes the spatial illusion of the mosaic most significant. He notes that, the artist uses different techniques from other paintings to create this spatial illusion. The author is trying to demonstrate that the mosaic has different sections as it relates to the planes. He argues that the scale of these planes are not uniformed. While Thomas Mathew’s discussion reflects symbolism. He argues that this image is of Christ but it doesn’t have any feature of an emperor, thus Christ is not consider to be imperial nor majestic. However, he states that the artist uses some borrowed symbols from the father of the gods, Jupiter, in order for Christ to be a God and equal to his Heavenly Father.
Kitzinger …show more content…
He states that the artist did not use the type of clothing and accessories that you would expect from an emperor. Instead, he wears clothing and a slippers like a normal person. Mathew also notes that although the artist made Christ’s throne luxurious it lacks the imperial color, purple. However, Christ wears gold and a halo which symbolizes a Heavenly God, but not an emperor. The author also states Christ’s hair, forehead, beard and his face are similar to that of Jupiter who is a god. Thus, the artist depicts the image of Christ as a God but not has …show more content…
However, each discussion focused on different aspect of the painting. Kitzinger mentions Christ but he focused on the setting most, especially the background. In other words, he speaks about the planes; its space and what that means. While Mathew did not mention anything about the setting, plane nor space but rather explains the figure of Christ itself and how it is represented. It was interesting to me that Kitzinger discussed everything accept the image of Christ, where Mathew discusses everything except the setting. However, these authors did not analyse the whole interpretation of the mosaic. Kitzinger did not explain the meaning of the figures in full details. He mentioned the figures and the elements in the mosaic, but his analysis focus only on the setting. In contrast, Mathew only focus was on the image of Christ. He focused on the symbols of Christ, but nothing else. He did not mention the female figures and the apostles who create a pattern leading up to God. This pattern helps viewers to see that Christ is majestic and imperials before they even analyse the mosaic. In my home land of Jamaica I visited many churches and observed the stained glass windows like this mosaic. It never occurred to me that there was a deeper meaning than just a pretty window. Now I understand the use of the space and the iconographic can present a deeper meaning. Next time I see a stained