Cassie
I. Power and Authority
The first chapter of Frilingos introduces the reader to the philosophy behind the visual culture of Rome that will be explored in depth throughout the book. The collective sense of alienation that was felt by Christians and is represented in the book of Revelation are explored in the context of the scholarly works of Said, Foucault and Bhabha.
Said’s work on Orientalism is introduced to familiarize the reader with the “Other”. This othering is described in relation to the Roman gaze that is used as a form of domination over the marginal groups (2). Frilingos states that the “Other” is used to produce knowledge through the use of biblical imagery throughout Revelation (8). In addressing the other, Said drew upon the conceptual discourse of Michel Foucault. These discourses in power and hierarchy govern the production of knowledge and truth within the society (9). Foucault’s analysis on societal structures of family and sexuality shows this power in knowledge production as they engender the realness of the social formations.
Postcolonial thought in Said’s Orientalism showed the interdependence of dominant and subaltern effects that power has on the formation of these societal identities. While his focus is on this interdependence, Bhabha’s analysis draws on the ambivalence that characterizes the power within the imperial cult (10). Frilingos uses this to focus on the subjectivity in the viewer becoming viewed within the Roman spectacle of life. By drawing upon these three scholars, the author sets the stage for the critically analyzing the gaze of the Roman Empire.
II. Visual Culture
Ara Pacis asserts the visual authority that the Roman emperor had over ancient Roman society. The constant reminder and gaze of the altar serves to show the power that the emperor has at all times. This gaze is not just unidirectional as Frilingos argues, it is a balance of seeing and being seen (15). By maintaining this balance, the emperor can perform for society to show his glory and power but also assert it by gazing at the people through a variety of visual forms.
Imperial shrines and spectacles in addition to altars show different ways that Rome used it’s visual culture as means of control and assertion of power. These displays cement the ideals citizens were held to by gladiator displays, exotic animal fights or public executions. Additionally the gaze could focus on articulate orators that solidified the physiognomic ideals Roman society held people to. These factors show the scholarly works described above within the Roman Empire.
By seeing and being seen, a spectator is removed from a passive role and place into an active role. This active role is perpetuated throughout the spectacle that the emperor emphasizes through this Roman imperium paradigm (21). Visual authority defines the art of the spectacle in effectively asserting the power of the emperor.
I. Power and Authority
The first chapter of Frilingos introduces the reader to the philosophy behind the visual culture of Rome that will be explored in depth throughout the book. The collective sense of alienation that was felt by Christians and is represented in the book of Revelation are explored in the context of the scholarly works of Said, Foucault and Bhabha.
Said’s work on Orientalism is introduced to familiarize the reader with the “Other”. This othering is described in relation to the Roman gaze that is used as a form of domination over the marginal groups (2). Frilingos states that the “Other” is used to produce knowledge through the use of biblical imagery throughout Revelation (8). In addressing the other, Said drew upon the conceptual discourse of Michel Foucault. These discourses in power and hierarchy govern the production of knowledge and truth within the society (9). Foucault’s analysis on societal structures of family and sexuality shows this power in knowledge production as they engender the realness of the social formations.
Postcolonial thought in Said’s Orientalism showed the interdependence of dominant and subaltern effects that power has on the formation of these societal identities. While his focus is on this interdependence, Bhabha’s analysis draws on the ambivalence that characterizes the power within the imperial cult (10). Frilingos uses this to focus on the subjectivity in the viewer becoming viewed within the Roman spectacle of life. By drawing upon these three scholars, the author sets the stage for the critically analyzing the gaze of the Roman Empire.
II. Visual Culture
Ara Pacis asserts the visual authority that the Roman emperor had over ancient Roman society. The constant reminder and gaze of the altar serves to show the power that the emperor has at all times. This gaze is not just unidirectional as Frilingos argues, it is a balance of seeing and being seen (15). By maintaining this balance, the emperor can perform for society to show his glory and power but also assert it by gazing at the people through a variety of visual forms.
Imperial shrines and spectacles in addition to altars show different ways that Rome used it’s visual culture as means of control and assertion of power. These displays cement the ideals citizens were held to by gladiator displays, exotic animal fights or public executions. Additionally the gaze could focus on articulate orators that solidified the physiognomic ideals Roman society held people to. These factors show the scholarly works described above within the Roman Empire.
By seeing and being seen, a spectator is removed from a passive role and place into an active role. This active role is perpetuated throughout the spectacle that the emperor emphasizes through this Roman imperium paradigm (21). Visual authority defines the art of the spectacle in effectively asserting the power of the emperor.