Monday, December 9, 2013

Deposition


Barocci’s Deposition is probably his most famous altarpiece. He was commissioned in 1567 to start the altarpiece, he finished Christmas 1569. The Deposition still hangs in the Cathedral in Perugia. Many historians believe that Barocci would have studied Raphael’s Entombment and some other paintings by him. No one can truly say that Barocci had studied Raphael’s paintings but there are certain characteristics that the people of Perugia would have recognized. Especially the emotion shown with the Madonna and the surrounding figures. The fainting Madonna is very similar to the emotional Madonna of Raphael’s. The surrounding figures in Barocci’s version, are dramatic, Mary Magdalene’s arms are outstretched, reaching toward the fainted Madonna. Another aspect of the painting that the people of Perugia would have at least associated with Raphael’s painting, is the young men that Barocci has depicted taking Christ down from the cross are similar to those of Raphael.
 Raphael, Entombment

However, that is where the similarities seem to have stopped. Barocci’s Deposition is a registered painting. All the women are at the bottom of the altarpiece, while all the me are above with Christ. I personally don’t think it means anything, but thought it was an interesting aspect of the painting. Of the men helping take Christ down from the cross, the only face we can see is Christ’s and the man who is holding Christ’s feet. I found this another interesting fact.

The composition appears crowded with little open space. The viewer’s eyes have very little place to rest, but the eyes move throughout the altarpiece in an orderly way. Your eyes start at the top of the cross, then moving down the center post of the cross to Christ’s head. Then the eyes move down Christ’s body to the man who is holding Christ’s feet. Then the eyes follow down to the Virgin. From there the eyes travel to the edges of the altarpiece and go back up the ladders to once again land on Christ. Barocci uses diagonals to create a composition that is constantly moving and engaging for the public eye.
  Barocci, Deposition

Visitation


Barocci’s altarpiece, Visitation, painted in 1583-1586 for a side chapel in the Chiesa Nuova, is very different than his regular altarpieces, like Perdono. Visitiation appears to be a straight narrative from the Bible. It is not terribly conceptual, like the Misericordia or abstract in the sense of the Immaculate Conception. Again, it appears to be a straight forward narrative.

This altarpiece was commissioned by the Oratorians in Rome. During this time period the Oratorians were collecting masterpieces from modern painters, much like Isabelle d’Este was trying to collect painters for her personal collection. This group, were committed to the study of traditional Christian imagery, especially interested in history of image used in worship. The Oratorians, even as far to contact Cardinal Pierdonato Cesi to talk to the Duke of Urbino, who in turned talked to Barocci. It is believed that Barocci accepted the commission because it would reestablish him in Rome.
  Barocci, Visitation, 1583

Visitation depicts when Elizabeth comes to visit the Virgin Mary and Joseph, as depicted in the Book of Luke. Based on the number of studies that survive, Barocci spent a large amount of time trying to render a painting that took the traditional imagery that the Oratorians wanted and still dealt with the subject in a modern way. In the center of the painting are Mary and Elizabeth standing on some stairs. Interestingly, Barocci depicted Elizabeth standing above the Virgin on the stairs but Elizabeth is leaning down, so the Virgin has a higher hierarchy in the painting than Elizabeth. These two women are depicted many times together, throughout Biblical imagery. This is an usual aspect of the painting because usually, the Virgin is always positioned higher in the painting than anyone else, unless Jesus is in the composition. Based on the studies that survived, Barocci was mainly focused on the different poses of Elizabeth and the Virgin. One even had the Virgin’s back to the viewer – this had never been done before. Overall, Barocci had taken a subject that had been depicted many times and tried to modernize it.

Sunday, December 8, 2013

Immaculate Conception


Much like his other altarpieces, Barocci’s Immaculate Conception, ca. 1570s, modern viewers seem to be misunderstand the meaning behind it. Modern viewers tend to look at an altarpiece by Barocci and see pale pinks, and glowing yellows and soft simple piety. Often those characteristics are associated with piety that is simple and sentimental. However, for modern viewers to truly understand the Immaculate Conception, we need to look at the religious context that Barocci created this altarpiece in.

The 16th century was a time of religious turmoil; the Catholic church was losing power and in the Counter-Reformation, the Church was working on combining art with the new ideals of devotional images. In one image, a painter must have aspect of divoto (devotion) and it also had to have the illusion or allure of vaghezza (vagueness), for it to be considered a successful painting. Barocci was one of the few who truly became successful at this. One of his best examples is the Immaculate Conception.

When looking at the Immaculate Conception, the Virgin Mary is right in the middle of the painting – she is equal distance from all edges. She is isolated within a cloud-like background, no one touches her or even approaches her. She is standing alone with her eyes downcast, in a seemingly pious pose. Small angels/cherubs poke out of the clouds surrounding the Virgin. All we see is their heads and parts of their wings. The Virgin appears to even be standing on the back of a cherub. Near the Virgin’s halo, we can also see additional faces of more cherubs. But they appear to be drawings. Could they be underdrawings for this altarpiece? If so, then why would Barocci leave them and not cover them up? The only place these drawings appear is at the top near the Virgin’s head.
 

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Madonna del Popolo


One of Barocci’s best received altarpieces in his lifetime was his Madonna del Popolo (1575-1579). This is also considered to be one of his most complex pieces, in terms of composition and idea.
 Barocci, Madonna del Popolo, 1575-1579

The confraternity that commissioned this piece was the Fraternità di Santa Maria della Misericordia and they were the leading lay fraternity in Arezzo. This confraternity was known for their charitable works both for the church and for the city of Arezzo. They identified strongly with how they represented themselves, so they were known for commissioning artists to create various Madonna images. Some of the artists the confraternity commissioned were Bernardo Rossellino, Bartolomeo della Gatta, Domenico Pecori, and Rosso Fiorentino and Federico Barocci. All of the commissions were extremely different, but were of the same subject: the Virgin Mary presiding over a large mass of people. These image was the confraternity’s logo, in a sense, because this Madonna is concerned for her people and is looking over them. Very much like the confraternity and their charity work.
 
 
Domenico Pecori, Madonna of the Misericordia, c. 1510

Barocci’s Madonna del Popolo, however, is extremely different than any previous commission. He has separated the heavenly realm from the earthly by a cloud, which the divine are sitting on. On the far right there is a baby cherub/angel who seems to be falling off the cloud but is resisting with all his strength, physically pulling himself back up onto the cloud at the Virgin’s feet. This is the closest any of the divine figures get to breaching the mortal realm in this altarpiece. Another difference is in most depictions of the Madonna, she is either alone or she is accompanied by baby Jesus; in Barocci’s altarpiece, the Madonna is accompanied by an adult Jesus.

In the mortal realm the viewer sees a mass of people, but one small group seems to be bathed in golden light, a mother and a small child. The mother is looking at the child instructing it to look up at the divine, but the child is fascinated with a group of figures on the right and is not looking up at the Madonna. I believe, Barocci highlighted this group of figures because it is what a traditional Madonna and child would generally look like. They are also directly opposite of the Madonna and Christ, creating a strong diagonal across the altarpiece.

Another aspect of the painting that is interesting is the center of the painting. It is generally empty, all that shares this space is a small dove which is surrounded by glowing, white light.

This was one of Barocci’s most successful altarpieces in his lifetime. I believe because he was exploring how the divine and the mortal interact and how they can reflect each other. This is the case with the Madonna and Child and the mortal mother and child.

Monday, December 2, 2013

Martyrdom of St. Vitale


Federico Barocci, once again, created a spectacular altarpiece, The Martyrdom of St. Vitale. Unlike the pervious altarpieces I have presented, this one is unknown. Very little is known about it, other than art historians place in around 1580 to 1583.
   Barocci, Martyrdom of St. Vitale
 
However, I found this altarpiece extremely interesting because Rubens would eventually use it for inspiration for his Martyrdom of St. Livinus. It is believed that Rubens was particularly interested in the undulating body of St. Vitale.
 
 Rubens, Martyrdom of St. Livinus
 
Like in Barocci’s Entombment, Barocci was able to pull the audience into the altarpiece by establishing this clear twisting motion in his composition. The viewer’s eyes go to the angel-like figure at the top who is bathed in golden light, then following the downward motion of the arm, the viewer sees St. Vitale. Following the pointed figure of St. Vitale, we look at the surrounding figures and our eyes finally land on the mother with her children, who reminds us of the Virgin Mary. It is believed he used the same model for this figure as he did for his Madonna images. So, our eyes twist and move throughout the painting, but each figure as a twisting motion as well. This device is one that sets Barocci apart from his fellow painters because only he uses this twisting motion to draw people into the paintings.

Saturday, November 30, 2013

Mannerism


I found both readings this week very interesting. They both were very focused on the formation of Mannerism and what forms it took. What I found interesting about Freedberg’s book Painting in Italy 1500-1600, was the cultural aspects that he discusses. He writes that early Mannerists were concerned with emotional problems that were highly personal. This is interesting because it is another emergence of personally feelings for the artists and their subjects. Humanism allows emotions to an extent but it focuses on how many thinks, instead of how they feel. Symith’s article suggests that some of Michelangelo’s late paintings could either be High Renaissance or early Mannerist. I am suggestion that his late paintings are early Mannerists based on the evidence presented in these two readings. Many of his writings tell us that he was struggling with many personal issues at the end of his, both emotional and physical. His health was taking a downturn and he felt his art was taking a toll because of it. I believe this idea is evident in Michelangelo’s Last Judgment, especially when we look at what historians believe his is self-portrait; the man without no bones.

Another aspect of the readings I found interesting was Freedberg claimed that Mannerists were painting in a restrictive and reactionary cultural atmosphere and that art was being created under a controlled formulae. Symith seems to support Freedberg’s claim in his article. Mannerists were trying to create the ideal body for painting that could cross over all subject matters. This lead artists to establish a set number of poses for the bodies they were painting. Every pose in Mannerist art seems to follow these set poses; there are about 20 of them. What made them react to the cultural atmosphere this way? What caused artists to tamper down their create processes and limit themselves to 20 odd poses for the human body? What caused artists to turn away from works like Leonardo’s and Michelangelo’s? I think they were reacting to the Counter-Reformation and the lasting consequences that had on the art produced at this time. The Catholic Church was questioning and reviewing their art commissions and I believe the artists responded in kind, which lead to Mannerist art.

Monday, November 25, 2013

Michelangelo's Last Judgment: Part 3


Leo Steinberg’s article on Michelangelo’s Last Judgment takes a very different approach than Marcia Hall’s. Steinberg has picked 15 points to focus on, instead of focusing on the whole fresco. However, instead of being limited to those 15 points, Steinberg is able to discuss the majority of the painting in some form or another. Section 3: That the gesture of Christ reveals a mystery, not a foregone conclusion was my favorite section of Steinberg’s article. He is combining historical writings, historical events, and knowledge of Michelangelo’s past work and style to argue his point. Steinberg argues that Michelangelo depicts the hand gestures this way to suggest the nature of duality in the divine figure; man but divine, anger and mercy, judgment and saving. All these are elements of the duality of Christ. Steinberg is arguing that Michelangelo is not reusing these gestures, as they have been seen on two pervious works, but is suggestion an ambiguous duality that only a select few would recognize. Earlier in his career, Michelangelo sculpted a bronze statue of Pope Julius II, since destroyed; it has been described as having a gesture very similar to that depicted in the Last Judgment. When asked whether it was a blessing or a curse, Michelangelo answered, “It threatens this people, Holy Father, lest they be foolish.” This statement, again suggests the duality of the divine was something that Michelangelo has been thinking about and trying to visual represent for a while. Is the Last Judgment the final representation of this duality? Steinberg suggests it, but cannot prove anything beyond presenting his evidence and leaving it up the reader.

Michelangelo's Last Judgment: Part 2


In continuing reading Marcia Hall’s chapter on the Last Judgment, I found it interesting of the reaction that Michelangelo received. Due to the changing religious climate what was accepted 30 years ago, was no longer accepted. Again, if we use the Sistine Chapel as an example, even though the style has changed as Michelangelo matured as an artist, we can see that he had always used nude figures, especially nude males. Also, he has always manipulated his figures into seemingly impossible poses that show off the strength and vitality of the human figure. However, either Michelangelo was ignoring the religious climate or he ignored directives from his patrons. No one can know what made Michelangelo painted such an altarpiece other than he was simply painting as he had become known for. Either way, the reaction was probably not what he expected. Pietro Aretino, a friend of Michelangelo’s, wrote, “martyrs and virgins in improper attitudes, men dragged down by their genitals, things in front of which brothels would shut their eyes in order not to see them.” This is interesting because this probably isn’t Aretino’s true opinion. He was under suspicion from the Church and was afraid he writings would get him in trouble. One of the easiest ways to appease the Church at this time was to condemn someone else. Michelangelo was an easy target having just finished the Last Judgment. Even after Michelangelo’s death, theologians were using his Last Judgment as an example; an example of what not to do when painting sacred images. During the mid-1500s and well into the 1600s, the Church was feeling threatened. New sects of Protestantism were emerging all over the world, and the power that the Church held was diminishing. It was only because of that, that I believe that the Church would have turned their back on one of the most famous artist of their time. They needed to set an example for the rest of the world and reaffirm the Church’s power. They used Michelangelo has that example.

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Michelangelo's Last Judgment


Marcia Hall’s chapter on Michelangelo tells a brief history of the Last Judgment and starts to analyze the differences in Michelangelo’s fresco verses the other depictions of the Last Judgment. During the Renaissance, the Last Judgment had not been a popular subject due to religious upheaval sweeping across Europe. Some historians believe that with Michelangelo’s return to Rome, he brought a reassurance that Rome was returning as a cultural center. Hall wrote, “Where Michelangelo departs from the tradition is in his extraordinary figures. They are nude, and they do not reflect the full range of physical types and ages; on the contrary, they are all akin in their ideal strength and energy, representing Paul’s concept of the spiritual, or glorified, body.” This is where I disagree. Michelangelo wasn’t leaving tradition behind, or at least he wasn’t leaving his tradition behind. I would agree, he is leaving tradition behind in the sense he is not following other artists’ examples, but then he has never followed anyone else. If we look up at the Sistine Ceiling, we can see that he is simply recreating the success of those frescoes. He idealizes the figures, in the sense that they are young and dramatic and depict Michelangelo’s idea of an idealized male human form. Again, he is using foreshortening and contrapposto poses that hardly anyone had ever seen before. 
Another aspect of Hall’s chapter that I find interesting is she mentions that Michelangelo depicts his angels without wings, almost as if this was a new idea. However, we have seen Michelangelo do this before. In his Donni Tondo, historians believe the idealized, nude figures in the background are actually angels. In the Last Judgment, Michelangelo is reusing his pervious forms and painting tactics, but what is interesting is that the public views it as new and shocking, even though they have an example of Michelangelo’s work above their heads. Michelangelo was simply reasserting himself into the fabric of the art world within Rome.

Sunday, November 17, 2013

Goffen's Introduction to Titian


Rona Goffen’s Introduction to Titian was very interesting. It really illuminated the influence Titian had on the art world. He studied with Giovanni Bellini and started working under the master. He would eventually gain his own reputation for being a portraits. This skill leads to Titian to be recognized by Charles V, the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, and his son Philip II of Spain. After Charles V’s death, Titian would be inherited by Philip II. Titian would be commissioned for many portraits and other paintings. He would also create paintings that Philip II would later acquire. These paintings were not commissioned, but Philip II would acquire these paintings just because they were created by Titian. This is a modern way of buying art. Today, art dealers and collectors simply purchase paintings and pieces of art because they were created by a certain artist. I found this fact interesting because it is truly the first time in history that the artist is taking control of their career. Most art we learn about today is commissioned; the artists didn’t decide to paint the paintings that were created. Someone else decided what the artists created. However, Titian took control of his career. He catered his paintings to royalty but then was able to persuade Philip II of Spain to acquire his paintings simply because he painted them.

Another aspect of Goffen’s Introduction I found interesting is the discussion of misogyny in terms of Titian’s Venus of Urbino. Goffen is arguing that misogyny was an everyday presence during the Renaissance; it was present in literature, church, and art. The Church told everyone that it was Eve who caused the downfall of man and that she had many daughters and those daughters birthed the women of the world. Therefore, all women were innately going to cause the downfall of man. However, the Virgin Mary was the mother of Christ; the man would bring redemption to the world. Mary is alone in the world; she is the only woman like herself.

Goffen argues that Titian’s paintings of women are not pornographic in the sense of being purely sexual. Titian’s art always seems to involve some kind of affection or empathy for the subject. Also his women never seem to lacking in personality, unlike the women depicted in the writings of Pietro Aretino, a good friend of Titian’s and a writer. I found this idea interesting because it implies that Titian looked beyond the common attitude toward women. The idea that all of Titian’s women had a personality or inspired empathy, showed that he was thinking that women were not always thought of as the downfall of man, but they could be something else. They could be people with thoughts and emotions. But, what I found even more interesting is that Titian hide these thoughts and opinions in paintings that would be readily accepted as misogynic, like his Venus of Urbino.

Sunday, November 10, 2013

Check out this clip I found. It gives a great background of Barocci's life and shows his paintings. The clip is about 6 1/2 minutes long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60X9kasX8UU

Madonna of the Rosary


Barocci was commissioned for another altarpiece in the city of Senigallia. Only this time it was for the Confraternità dell’Assunta e del Rosario. The Brotherhood was started in 1481 in Rome to promote the devotion of the Virgin Mary. The Brotherhood in Senigallia contacted Barocci in 1589 to start his painting. It took him four years to complete this commission.

At first glance, Madonna of the Rosary looks almost a direct copy of his Perdono. St. Dominic kneels in the same pose as St. Francis, only in reverse. He is kneeling slightly off-center, again Barocci is playing with the vertical axis in his altarpiece. If the Virgin Mary drops the rosary, which she is holding it will land in the section of habit that St. Dominic is holding out. Barocci depicts St. Dominic this way because the rosary is the focus of this altarpiece, not St. Dominic or even the Virgin Mary and Child.
Perdono
Barocci, Madonna of the Rosary, 1589-1593

Mary and the Christ Child are also in almost identical poses; looking down at the saint. And again, Barocci uses registers; the heavenly versus the earthly. In early studies, the registers were not as clearly defined; the Virgin Mary and Child simply appeared, drifting into the earthly realm on a cloud-like wisp. However, the finished altarpiece shows a distinct register between the two realms. Barocci uses angels and cherub-like figures to act as the separating cloud.
Study

Previous studies show that Barocci tried many different compositions before settling on the composition he used for the Perdono.

 Another study
 
One unique feature of Madonna of the Rosary is the ring of figures that edge the golden glow behind the holy figures. While Barocci actually paints a halo behind the Virgin Mary, this ring of figures acts as an oversized halo around the holy mother and child. This illusion is completed with the heavenly gold clouds that are behind the two figures. The light from the heavenly realm is making, by contrast, the earthly realm look darker and more dissolute.