Look closely at Plates 3.2.17 and 3.2.18, and in no more than 500 words, outline the ways in which Ernst Ludwig Kirchner alters his original model from Benin to make it look more primitive.
When comparing the two images, although Kirchner appears to reproduce a detailed copy
of the Benin plaque, there are significant differences between the two works that give
each piece a completely different perspective to its audience.
The first obvious difference between the two works is in the intimate details each piece
portrays. The Benin plaque displays great detail in all aspects of the work, from the
clothing of the figures, with detailed and elaborate patterned robing and ornate beaded
embellishments and jewellery to the background of the composition, which has been
painstakingly decorated with patterned reliefs that suggest expert craftsmanship and a
remarkable attention to detail.
In contrast, Kirchnner's approach is much less precise. Although he has reproduced most
of the obvious representations found in the Benin plaque, it is much less defined and in
parts, ignores the intricate, close up details of its model, merely sketching roughly the
clothing and jewellery of the figures, ignoring the complex patterns so vividly displayed in
the Benin plaque. The background too is much less ornate with only the large flower like
decorations being represented, ommiting the intricate patterns that are so prevalent in the
original, giving Kirchner's work a much more basic feel than that of its complex and
carefully crafted model.
The figures in the Benin work are highly detailed, several displaying clearly the
scarification marks associated with their culture. Such marks are vaguely represented
only on the main figure in Kirchner's sketch which also has been altered to show the
upper torso of the figure naked, without the intricate belt like garment worn by this