Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
Betty's suggestion that thin is powerful and hence an example of small
being powerful is challenging. I am inclined to think that thinness in
women does not place the power in the women, but rather that the power
resides elsewhere (where exactly is very hard to say)--in "those" who make
us believe that thin is beautiful. Anoerexic (sp?) people are certainly
I certainly agree that technology has made smallness appealing---the
smallest watch, camera, TV, etc---but I don't think that the appeal is one
of power. We tend to say "small, but powerful" indicating that there is
something contradictory about these two notions. Contrast to "big, but
powerful" which doesn't make sense because the two concepts are connected.
But I'd love to hear what your students have to say about this. Best,
[marianna delafield] As I've been listening to all the various answers regarding power and size I have been reminded of the power of the very small "velvet Bruegal" paintings which we saw in Vienna some years ago, and also the many small paintings by Vermeer. Would they have spoken "Louder" had they been larger? I feel that the size of these wonderful pieces could not have been more powerful in any size other than that which the artists conceived. It appears to me that the concepts are the important thing, and that is what has moved so many about these painters and their work. The size is simply another aspect of the masterpiece. The small size pulls you in closely to look, and see and creates a more intimate relationship with the art work. The viewer becomes involved, as we look closely at the technique and the richness of the detail and color. Marianna