What is a kouros? In Greek, kouros means a young man. In art, a kouros is a statue of a young nude male who stands with his hands at his sides and one leg, usually his left, advanced. (Panels)

Throughout the Archaic period, which dates from 610 B.C. to 480 B.C., the basic pose of kouroi (plural for kouros) remained the same, though the anatomy of the figures gradually became more naturalistic or true to life. The ideology that the Greek sculptors wanted to achieve greater naturalism is proven through the progression of the kouroi during the period. (Panels)



At a glance, three main features deem the Getty Kouros under the general classification of a kouros: hands, hair, and feet. The hands are clenched into fists. They remain at the sides of the body. (Please refer to photograph 1.) The hair is arranged in a grid-like pattern. Thus, each strand is perfectly vertical, while remaining horizontally equivalent. (Please refer to photograph 2.) And the feet show the kouros standing with his left leg forward. (Please refer to photograph 3.) There will be a discussion about the placement of the feet later.



Before we get too much into the physical characterization of the kouros, let's first look at history of the Getty Kouros.



In the spring of 1983, the "Getty Kouros" was offered to The J. Paul Getty Museum situated in Malibu, California. Inquiries were made to the Greek and Italian governments in order to determine if the statue was legally removed from the country of origin. On September 18, 1983, the Kouros arrived at the Museum in seven pieces along with documents claiming it had been in a private Swiss collection since the 1930s. (Please refer to photograph 4.) For a period of twelve years after the arrival, art historians, conservators, and archeologists study the Kouros. Most of them believe that it is authentic for scientific tests indicate that the surface could not have been artificially produced. But a short time after, the question of authenticity comes about again when the documents claiming the Kouros was in a private Swiss collection proved to be forgeries. Despite this, the Kouros was put on display on October 1986. During the early nineties, a fake marble torso that is similar to the Getty Kouros is discovered. Therefore, the fake torso was purchased for research and the Kouros was removed from the display for reevaluation of the previous studies. In May of 1992, the Kouros was displayed in Athens, Greece, at an international conference on its authenticity. Although the majority of art historians and archeologists condemn it, most of the scientists believe the Kouros to be authentic. Up to this day, the question of the Getty Kouros' authenticity remains a mystery for the statue is still dated as "Greek, 530 B.C. or modern forgery." (Panels)

The controversy of the authenticity of the Getty Kouros will be addressed shortly after the characterization of the kouros.

Kroisos, a kouros from a cemetery at Anavysos, most resembles the Getty Kouros. By comparing the Getty Kouros shown at different angles (please refer to photographs 5,6,7,8,9) with Kroisos (please refer to photograph 10) a lot of similarities can be seen. The placement of the feet on the base in relation to the position of the hands and the shoulders, as well as details of the head, can help to determine whether a kouros turns to the left or right. This subtle movement in either direction is found among all authentic kouroi. The bent (or broken) axis of the left foot of the Getty Kouros is one of the features that indicates that it turns to the right. (Panels)

The characteristics that follow can be seen in both kouroi.



Both kouroi have their arms at their side, their fists gripped, and their pose is solid. The solidity of the statue is evident by the way the shoulders are horizontally parallel to the ground.



The kouroi are not clothed. Therefore, there is not any association of time or status. But they have been variously identified as gods, warriors, and victorious athletes. (Stokstad 169) Since all kouroi are nude, distinguishing between them is difficult. The face gives off the kouroi's individuality. They have a quality of life in their faces. They do not have a typical "portrait face." The eyes are relatively large and wide open. They are like windows to their souls for they are not simply painted on. The mouth forms a characteristic closed-lip smile known as the Archaic smile, apparently used to enliven the expressions of the figures. (Stokstad 170)



The musculature of the body plays two roles: it gives the figure a lifelike quality and it enhances the idea of weight of the figure. The swelling, rounded body forms the increasing interest of artists and their patrons in a more lifelike rendering of the human figure. The torso and limbs are rendered with greater anatomical accuracy. This gives the figure a notable athletic quality. (Stokstad 170) But the muscles, such as the abdomen, are portrayed in geometric patterns. The concept of weight can be seen by how the kouros' weight is supported. The swelling of the muscles help to see that the figure is not floating in space but is actually pulled down by gravity. The bulging helps elaborate on this pull downward and the massive approach by the sculptor. The weight is squarely supported. Although this pose itself is in an unusual one, the act of the balance of weight is defined for this free standing sculpture. By having one leg in front of the other, helps to show the weight shifted throughout the body in order to maintain the stance. The muscle over the knees is more realistic than the abdomen because of the softer tone. The "soft" look is achieved despite the fact that the figure is made up of dolomitic stone. It is not chunky or displayed as a "block of flesh." Basically, the muscles help to produce contours that are organic.



There is no doubt that the Getty Kouros represents a kouros. But a problem exists based upon the authenticity of the figure.

In the essay "What is Wrong with a Forgery," Lessing presents the issue of the significance of authenticity. Aesthetically, it should make no difference whether a work of art is authentic or a forgery. Instead of being embarrassed at having praised forgery, critics should have the courage of their convictions and take pride in having praised a work of beauty. (62) And when some deny this and argue passionately that, indeed, it does make a great deal of difference, they are only admitting that they do know something about the history of art and the value and reputation of certain artists. They are only admitting that they do not judge a work of art on purely aesthetic grounds but they also take into account when it was created, by whom, and how great a reputation it or its creator has. (63-64)



Another side to aesthetics is presented by Sparshott in his essay "The Disappointed Art Lover." The problem of forgery has come to attract the attention of students of aesthetics because it can be made to seem that there should be no problem. The perceptible qualities of the work now known to be forged remain what they were, so that the work is the same aesthetic object as it was before. All that has changed is the market value of the work. (246) Therefore, as long as the replica has the same qualities and presents the same effect to any viewer, then authenticity does not really matter.



The Getty Kouros, whether replicated or authenticated, helps to portray the kouros in the Archaic period in Greek art. And to me, the spirit of the art and the actual comprehension of the kouros is what is important.





Works Cited



"The Disappointed Art Lover." writ. Francis Sparshott. The Forger's

Art. gen. ed. Denis Dutton. Berkeley: University of California

Press, 1983.



Panels in the exhibition "The Getty Kouros." Located in The J. Paul

Getty Museum in Malibu, California.



Stokstad, Marilyn. Volume One Art History. New York: Prentice Hall,

Inc., 1995.



"What is Wrong with a Forgery?" writ. Alfred Lessing. The Forger's Art.

gen. ed. Denis Dutton. Berkeley: University of California Press,

1983.