Renaissance Humanism

The Influence of Humanism on Renaissance Art

One of the most obvious differences between Medieval and Renaissance Art is in the representation of the human form.  Medieval art stylized the human form, usually by elongating and simplifying it.  The human figure was usually clothed and often somewhat stiff; emotions and subject matter were emphasized over realism.  Renaissance artists were looking back to classical Rome for inspiration.  They rediscovered the humanist ideal; that humans have a great potential for perfection and that this perfection can be expressed in art as a natural, idealized human form.  Renaissance art used classical along with Christian Biblical themes to provide subject matter that could be treated with this new sensibility- such as Michelangelo’s sculpture of David.   The mythical beings and stories that came from Rome allowed artists to perfect the nude, as it was acceptable to portray the ancient gods and goddesses in this way.  The artist or patron reproducing classical subjects was regarded as an educated person, one who had read or learned about the mythic structure of Rome, not just someone who liked looking at naked people.  The availability of printed books also allowed people who were not super-rich or of the noble class, such as upwardly mobile merchants or artists to learn about classical themes more easily.

Humanism put artists in a position to grow into individuals noted for their achievements.  Artists often traveled widely and studied with several more experienced masters to learn their craft.  Most of the greats of the Renaissance such as Michelangelo, Raphael and Leonardo Da Vinci came from fairly humble backgrounds and served as apprentices during their early years.  They received the patronage of kings, popes and rich merchant-princes during the height of their careers.  Van Eyck had started the process of the transformation of the way artists were regarded in the stratified society of his time from a worker to a learned individual and the big three of the high Renaissance completed this change and went beyond it.  Leonardo worked for the Sforza family of Milan, lived at the Vatican at the invitation of Pope Leo X and then lived in France to be an advisor to King Francis I.  Raphael painted portraits of several wealthy Florentine patrons, and worked for Pope Julius II and Pope Leo X.  Michelangelo worked for the Medici family of Florence, sculpted the Pieta which was commissioned by a French cardinal and painted the Sistine Chapel’s ceiling at the behest of Pope Julius II.  All of these artists produced works that were considered to be divinely inspired.  Now we consider these artists to be among the immortal Masters of Art but they were probably something like an equivalent to modern rock or movie stars even during their own time.

The merchant-prince patrons of the arts also benefitted from the atmosphere of humanism during the Renaissance.  They did not automatically receive their power by inheritance; they had to buy, bribe or fight their way into prominence.  One way for the powerful merchant to proclaim his dominance was to hire important, in-demand artists to paint not only portraits of himself and his family but also to commission paintings in the churches and chapels being supported or built by this patron.  Leonardo’s The Last Supper was such a work.  It was commissioned to decorate the dining hall in the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan, Italy by Duke Ludovico Sforza of the ruling family of Milan at that time.  One of the ways ruling families in what is now Italy held onto their power was to form alliances with the local religious authorities and those of Rome, so supporting the church was very important.  The merchant-prince was expected to lead by his own competence and the power of his money, he could be challenged and deposed if he was seen to be losing either.  He had to rule based upon his ability; not just who his father was (though a powerful parent was a great help).  This sounds tough to do- but living up (or down) to one’s potential is also a humanist ideal.

A More Formal Look at Primavera

A Formal Look at a Work of Italian Early Renaissance Art

The work I have selected is Primavera (Spring) by Sandro Botticelli, c. 1482. Tempura on wood panel. 6’8”x10’4”.  Painted for the wedding of Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’ Medici and Semiramide d’Appiano, this work celebrates many changes:  from maiden to wife, winter to spring, darkness to light, sterility to fertility and Medieval to Renaissance.  

Tempura paint is usually considered to be more challenging to use and less versatile than oils, indeed, it does dry quickly and demands that the artist who uses it be technically proficient and sure of him or herself.  Each stroke of paint must be thought over and planned out as it will likely stay as a part of the composition; and yet luminous color and a broad range of hues are possible and quite evident in this work.  The rich, dark, greenish blacks of the foliage in both the background and foreground and especially the dark shrub behind the central figure of Venus (Aphrodite) dramatically displays the classical subject matter of the scene.  The light blue sky color weaves through the trunks of the trees and contrasts with most of the figures except Zephyrus who is the west wind from the sky and shows up as mainly the same color.  Tempura paint is an excellent medium to represent the diaphanous gowns of the Three Graces and Chloris before she undergoes her transformation into the fertile Flora.  Tempura paint also makes possible the great delicacy of the depiction of individual, recognizable flowers, floral decoration on Flora’s garment, along with hair and facial features.  The flowers are of recognizable May-flowering species to further the idea of the change from winter to spring.

This is quite a flat piece, the background of orange trees and especially the shrubbery behind Venus seem to form a wall, and the distraction of an atmospheric perspective is not welcome here.  The message of the changes of life and time is displayed in the actions and placement of the figures.  Most of the lines made by the figures and continued into the tree trunks have a lot of verticality but Zephyrus and Chloris lean to the center.  The raised arms of Mercury and the Three Graces add to the verticality but also help to frame the figure of Venus realized as a bride.  She and Flora echo each other as happy matrons.

Most of the figures are facing toward the viewer’s left, there are nine of them and they can be placed into triads with some thought.  The group on the right is of Zephyrus and Chloris/Flora.  Chloris twists to face Zephyrus as he accosts her as a maiden nymph; she looks apprehensive and disturbed as if she wants to get away, and is almost falling to the ground to do so.  She seems to resist the change in herself brought by Zephyrus and yet in her next incarnation, just to the left, she smiles at the viewer and seems satisfied as the fertile Flora, in the month of May, strewing her flowers like blessings upon the world.  Her change, though not welcomed at first, has transformed her into a more powerful and fully realized being- even her garment is more solid, less sheer.  This triad is balanced by the three graces of Chastity, Beauty and Love, right of center, who hold hands and dance their dance unchanged through time.  Cupid aims an arrow at them but doesn’t let it fly; he’s teasing them with the possibility of change but he is ignored.  The next triad is more disjointed.  It consists of Venus, Cupid and Mercury as a sort of family group (in classic myth Adonis is usually Venus’s lover).  Mercury is placed to the far left and is engaged in the activity of clearing the winter clouds and this change prepares the stage for the other figures. His position at the edge of the piece shows the husband as the one who goes out into the world and performs some activity to support the family. Venus is in a prominent place, central to the piece as the goddess of wedded love.  She looks out at the viewer serenely, seeming much like depictions of the Virgin Mary, except her child flies above on his own wings on his own independent trajectory rather than being displayed by Venus.  He is the agent of changes brought about by love, changes which seem random at first but may be predestined.  The message of this composition seems to be that though change might not be looked for or wanted the change from chastity to fertility- within the conventions of marriage- and from darkness to light are to be embraced.  The other changes shown in the piece all frame and support this ideal.

Week Two Art 236

The Northern Renaissance

Whether the medium was oil paint or sculpture, religious themes were the most prevalent in all Renaissance art- Northern and Southern.  Merchants were able to make great material gains during this time and the Catholic Church and the ruling classes also still had great power.  The Church used art to illustrate Bible stories for the edification of the faithful and the ruling classes wanted to be seen as charitable, Christian benefactors.  They could not only commission decoration for churches but had monks and nuns essentially hired to pray for their families to ensure them good fortune and a place in heaven. 

In the Late Medieval and Early Renaissance times, sculpture was much more highly valued than painting.  Painted pictures were on the outside doors of the altarpieces to cover the real treasure of the golden reliquary or the detailed, sculptured treasure within. The “real”, skilled, most admired painters illuminated manuscripts and other artisans worked in precious metals such as gold or wove intricate tapestries.  As the Renaissance continued, Classical Roman and Greek ideals were revived and supplanted the Gothic, more linear, less representational style.  The artists of the Northern Renaissance seemed to adopt a version of the Roman style of verism since they preferred highly realistic, individualistic depictions of human faces and figures with little idealism.  The artistic mastery of Jan van Eyck brought oil painting to the fore when it came to the way painted works were regarded.  Merchants, clerics, and royals as well as the common people and fellow artists marveled at the realism, the atmospheric perspective and the luminous colors.  The effect was of looking at a painting as a window into another, more holy world.   The faithful of the era were encouraged to imagine themselves as being able to go back to the times told about in the Bible and live the stories of the Bible as if they had been there.  In a portrait they could actually be pictured as being close enough to touch a Saint or other holy figure or could be placed under the protection of their Saintly namesake.  Commissioning an oil painting was also a way of displaying the wealth of the emerging merchant.  Paintings were luxury items, true, but the cost was not as far out of reach as a similar sculpture might be and a painting could be finished much more quickly.

The general acclaim that Van Eyck earned allowed him to work outside the traditional guild system where works were often completed by a shop full of craftsmen who each specialized in one area of art.  Van Eyck raised the way those who worked in oils were regarded from painter/craftsman to artist; a learned, well-traveled, famous individual who was his own man in the sense that he ranked himself above the guild workers.  The artistry of van Eyck was such that he was credited with inventing oil paints and though this was not true he was able to paint difficult details such as the gleam of gold, the sparkle of gemstones and the clarity of water.  He used glazing techniques- built up thin washes of pigment- to give his details that luminous quality that was thought of as magical at the time. 

Art 236 Why We Like Art From the Renaissance

Week One Post: Introduction to Renaissance Art

Looking in the book, the subject matter of Renaissance art is still mainly religious, as in the medieval period, but the human, emotional aspects are more evident.  The figures are often very realistic and dramatically posed with a sophisticated use of light and shadow.   The paintings are especially complex with a lot of interaction between multiple figures.  The development and use of oil paint, with its inherent flexibility, lent a luminous, transparent quality to the representations of subjects. 

I think that our culture likes to focus on the Renaissance because the values of Renaissance culture and preferred subject matter of the works of that time are starting to become closer to our own.  There are lots of religious subjects used and in these times they are the conventional, accepted understanding we have of traditional Christianity.  Portraits are of the wealthy and used to display their wealth and power in the most sumptuous of clothing and settings.  Often the wealthy and powerful are shown combined with the religious subject matter as sponsors and benefactors: not an advertisement exactly, but certainly propaganda.  The rich could show their piety and devotion to the church and their wealth and at the same time gain the support of the powerful hierarchy of the religious community.  A modern person like Bill Gates endows scholarships partly because it’s something he feels strongly about and partly to gain points with the public.  In either case, the people then think of the rich as doing good works.  The art of the Renaissance took the place of TV, newspapers and books for most people, at least until printed materials became widely available.  Subjects, beautifully and realistically painted, that we still can relate to are bound to be popular despite the passage of a few centuries. 

Michelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci and Raphael were the stars of their time, and still, of course, are known today.  It’s mainly the work of these artists that the High Renaissance be considered the pinnacle of artistic achievement.  Their works show great technique, conventional subject matter, realistic forms and identifiable human emotions.  These artists painted and sculpted pieces which decorate famous chapels.  They are known and still visited by people from all over the world.   No one wants to go to Rome and Vatican City and fail to see these works.   The names call their masterpieces to mind and vice-versa.  Most of us know who painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel (Michelangelo), The Last Supper (Leonardo) and The School of Athens (Raphael).  The human figures in these works show the emotions, demeanor and iconography associated with the character of each individual.  These frescoes all tell their stories in ways we still understand and identify with as the traditional stories of our civilization.  In The Last Supper, Judas looks evil, in the creation panel of the Sistine Chapel God appears as the big old man in the sky and Adam as his son.  These works have been critiqued, analyzed and enjoyed by millions of people over the many years that they have existed.  Even if we put our own modern spin on interpreting the meanings and purposes of these works, the art of these masters- those bits of paint on plaster or canvas- continue to record the history of humanity and how we think and feel about our world.

Extra Credit Post

Return to a Fascinating Face

I decided to find out more information about the Roman Emperor Caracalla of the fascinating intense stare.  I looked on the artstor site through the library (http://library.artstor.org.exp.lib.cwu.edu/library/) and found several images of him in sculpture and on coins.  With his furrowed brow and habitual scowl he is recognizable in every medium I saw, which surprised me a little.  I think that Roman verism is the reason his image transfers so well- we see the same features without too much artistic license being taken.  He doesn’t look like just any emperor- he looks like Caracalla.  The other sculptures I studied are in the Louvre and in the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin and they look enough alike to be the same work shown from different angles. They may even be copies of each other.  Caracalla’s hair is slightly longer in these statues and curly and his beard is more evident than in the picture in our book, his head is turned somewhat to the side and he wears the cloak that was the source of his name fastened at his shoulder by a round clasp.  It may be the way the bust depicted in our book was lit that made Caracalla appear older or maybe the style of verism really exaggerated the lines in his face.  With the slightly longer, curly hairstyle in the other busts I saw he does seem a little younger (more like the Greek ideal) but no softer.   His face on coins is usually in profile but still shows the furrowed brow, short, curly hair and strong jaw of the sculptures.  Unlike in this country, the ruler in power was the one to be pictured on the coins during his reign, much like in Great Britain today.   Coins were also made to commemorate military victories, coronations and other events that were important to the state.

This emperor’s birth-name was Lucius Septimius Bassianus, born in 188 the son of the Emperor Septimius Severus.  He was the darling of the Roman army and his soldiers gave him the nickname “Caracalla” after the Gallic-style cloak he wore.  A caul is a covering even in the English Language and in Latin calleo means to have a thick skin or in other words to be callous.  In 198 his father crowned him co-emperor and he was re-named Marcus Aurelius Antoninus after the conqueror he sought to emulate.  He was said to “possess the savagery of Caligula and the paranoia of Nero”.  I can’t imagine that he would be fun to be around.  His father did actually did conquer in Parthia (Iran and Iraq) a decade and a half earlier and Caracalla was on his way into the Fertile Crescent area to do battle there when he was executed by a Praetorian Prefect, Macrinus, who feared that his master was becoming too powerful.  At this time the army tended to decide who would lead the empire by killing their old leader and replacing him with another one of their choosing, especially when the current ruler seemed to be becoming too mentally unstable.   Since he was murdered in 217 he was only 29 years old at the time of his death, which is not the age of an old man.  He had been living as a soldier from the time he was big enough to lift a sword though, and this shows in his face.*

*The information about Caracalla in this paragraph is from an article in Expedition, or more formally, Darbyshire,  Gareth, Harl, Kenneth W., and Goldman, Andrew L.  “To the Victory of Caracalla: New Roman Altars at Gordion.” Expedition 51-2 (2009) 31-38.

Art Mystery: Some Things I Learned About in This Class

Post Nine:   Week Eleven

In this class I particularly liked to find out about styles and techniques of art that I didn’t know much about before I took this course.  The first type of art that was new to me was Near Eastern art, which if I had seen before I would have assumed was Egyptian.  Works like Assurnasirpal Killing Lions seem to be Egyptian until one knows what Near Eastern elements to look for.  This work was certainly influenced by Egyptian art but shows less stylization and more naturalism than similar works from Egypt.  The Egyptian (3,000-332 BCE) and the Near Eastern (3,500-334 BCE) civilizations arose separately and existed for centuries as separate entities yet they must have influenced each other’s art and attitudes.  Hierarchy of scale is usually more apparent in Egyptian art and Egyptian artists obeyed conventions such as the gridded proportions of the figures on the stele of the sculptor Userwer that the Near Eastern kingdoms didn’t always use.  They had their own conventions, of course since many figures seem very stout and short compared to Egyptian figures as in Assurbanipal and his Queen in the Garden.  Near Eastern artists didn’t follow the same set of conventions throughout their civilization like the Egyptians did.  Egypt is more isolated by the Sahara Desert on one side and the Ocean on the other.  The Near East is in a better geographic location to be influenced by other peoples from the north, west and east; this may explain why their art is more variable.

I also liked learning about Roman verism.  To go from the idealized youth of Greece to veneration of the somewhat haggard lines of age and experience in Rome appealed to me quite a lot.  Whether a society values youth or experience is really just a fashion of the time.  During the time of the American Revolutionary War (1776) the fashionable were wearing white powdered wigs to imitate their elders who had naturally gray hair.  Fashion at the court of a royal was whatever the monarch dictated and people often imitated the ruler at whatever their apparent age.  Even during the late Roman Empire we could compare the busts of Commodus and Caracalla and see the youth and beauty verses age and experience as approaches to propaganda.  I think when one is younger it seems obvious that youth, energy and beauty is better as a way to be portrayed.  Then as one gets older one can appreciate experience and relate to those who are shown to be elders.  It seems to me that the Greek Civilization represented youth and the Roman Empire used Greece as a starting point, matured as a civilization and then eventually aged and died; a natural process, no doubt, that was shown in the progression of styles used by artists.

I was also interested in the origin and conventions of the Byzantine style.  Actually, all Early Medieval art was a bit of a mystery to me.  It seems most sources I’ve seen are so busy explaining about how creative art died with the fall of Rome that they neglect the entire era.  It’s true that most of the art is not secular but to ignore this era is to ignore all of the inspiration attendant with the first flowering of Christianity.  The elongation of figures continued from Byzantium to the Early Medieval era as part of the artistic conventions of iconic art; becoming less stiff and more graceful as time went on.  We can compare the Mosaics of Emperor  Justinian and Empress Theodore (With Attendants) from 547 (page 240) with the more fluid and emotional  Crucifixion Mosaic from the Church of the Dormition, Daphni, Greece from the 11^th century (page 250).   Both these works are highly stylized but the Crucifixion shows much more emotion, a trend that continued on through the Medieval Romanesque and Gothic styles.  I wanted to compare two mosaics here because as materials used to decorate churches changed from tiles to sculpture to paint to stained glass the emotions portrayed also changed.  The flexibility of paint and, in illuminated manuscripts, line invited close examination and personal contemplation such as the Chi Iota Page of the Book of Kells or the Worcester Chronicle page of Those Who Work; Those Who Fight; Those Who Pray.  Frescoes and paintings can tell their stories in nearly any interior space and mosaics, stone or other sculpture and stained glass seem better suited for larger or more public indoor or outdoor works.

I had also always wondered about how the paint on the glass in a stained glass window lasted for hundreds of years.  Here I found out (on page 497) that the metallic paint was actually heated and fused to the glass so it would last as long as the glass itself.  I also liked some of the pictures that were provided to illustrate how Gothic architecture could allow for such large areas of glass that the interior of these cathedrals looked like the inside of a kaleidoscope such as in the Upper Chapel of the Sainte Chapelle in Paris.