The work of art from the Early Renaissance that I have chosen is the Camera Picta by Andrea Mantegna, from the Ducal Palace in Mantua, on page 620. And the work of art from the high Renaissance that I have chosen to compare it to is Corregio's Assumption of the Virgin from the Parma Cathedral in Itally, on page 653. More specifically I should be saying that I will only be comparing a part of the Camera Picta, its domed ceiling, to the Assumption of the Virgin.
Upon the domed ceiling Mantegna painted what is called a tour de force of radical perspective in a technique called di sotto in su, “from below upwards.” It makes it appear as if the dome has opened up to the sky and heavens above the building. He painted the opening to this sky as a large oculus in the form of simulated marble and a mosaic-covered vault. Looking down through the oculus are a series of figures ranging from children, to adults, to even a peacock. There is even a large pot painted on the top opening of the oculus, looking as if it could fall down onto the viewer.
This same kind of illusionistic ceiling can be seen later, in the high Renaissance, in Corregio's Assumption of the Virgin. This time on a more grander scale, that employs other painting techniques, such as foreshortening, idealism, and sfumato. The “opening” in this ceiling leads up to a blinding white and yellow light, as figures are clouds are pulled and swirled upwards toward it. There is even one figure out in the middle of the painting as if he is either being sucked up towards the light or falling down away from it. Either way though the figure looks frantic and is reaching out to the other figures in the mass of clouds.
In the Camera Picta there is a good sense of depth in the sky from the clouds gradually getting smaller as they fade back into space, and are covered with atmospheric perspective. There is also a good sense of depth from the oculus, that makes the opening really look as if it's a tube leading into another space. However, even though some of the figures have body parts extending out into our space, a lot of the figures have rather flat faces and features. Naturalism is also lost with the wings and halos that some of the figures have as well, and their isn't a great amount of dynamic unity in the painting. Some of the figures do have their bodies angled in ways to help move your eyes around the painting, but there are still rather stiff and some of the figures (or heads) are just kind of there and not doing anything.
While in Corregio's painting there is a lot of dynamic unity. Every figure in the painting is posed in a dramatic way, and trying to hold onto something as the clouds and winds pull on them. One figure can be seen holding onto a plant for dear life, while others are seen grasping to other figures around them while their clothes are blown and twisted around them. Because of the picture some of the figures do look flat and the perspective is lost, however there is still a great amount of detail and foreshortening happening with arms, legs, and bodies as there are blown upwards into the sky. The sfumato also adds a soft touch to the painting making clouds and people farther into the painting look fuzzier, and adding depth to the painting. There is also a great sense of naturalism in the painting, unlike the Camera Picta there are no halos, or wings, on any of the figures and you can see great details in the muscles and features of each figure.
However despite these differences I would not say that Corregio's painting is better than Mantegna's. This is because both of these painters and paintings accomplish the illusion of space on a flat surface. Both were able to accurately portray an opening to the heaves on a ceiling. And despite how simple Mantegna's is there is something that I really like about just seeing the clouds slowly disappear as they get higher and higher up.
--------------------
On another note I would also like to add that I was tempted to write about Michelangelo for this blog, but I didn't want it to be nothing but a 500 long rant about what I do and don't like about his work. I do recognize him as having amazing talent in the way he can portray clothing, hair, muscles...etc. in marble. But when I see things like this http://renresearch.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/michelangelo-night.jpg a woman who has breasts that are about a foot wide apart.. I can't recognize Michelangelo as a truely great artist.
5 comments:
Your observation to both piece are quite nice. The Assumption of the Virgin piece was a bit more idealistically driven & posed a lot of high renaissance quality. You can clear see the difference in periods of time between the two pieces. The Mantua just kind of shows you the view but nothing beyond that point vs. the Assumption of the Virgin, gives you that view and leads your eyes closer toward a world beyond that.
Two illusionistic ceilings! Nice choices for comparison!
Correggio's painting is very dynamic and dramatic. In fact, some scholars interpret Correggio as a "proto-Baroque" artist. When we talk about the Baroque period, I think you will be able to see how Correggio's work seems much more similar to Baroque art than much of the art produced in the Renaissance period.
-Prof. Bowen
What's interesting about the Camera Pieta's dome is that the di sotto in su technique really forces the audience to engage in the painting. Not only that but putting things such as the large pot on the edge of the oculus is even more engaging. I think di sotto in su is so ingenious of the artists to do. It really takes paintings to a whole new level. The painters not only focused on perfecting naturalism but also focused on how to make their subject matter fun and interesting which makes the viewer want to look at it even longer. Good job on your post, very easy to understand.
I absolutely loved the Assumption of the Virgin ceiling fresco, it is so rich and vibrant. It is one of the paintings in this chapter (so far) that has really grabbed my attention. I like how you emphasized on how figures got blurrier upon this painting, that was one of the things I noticed too. It really adds a great stepping stone towards the new era of Renaissance art
I found you blog interesting to read. It had a lot of good information. I found that you descriped the figures more then the way they are made which is nice because I have read some that are the other way around, but doing it this way worked for you and was very interesting to read. well done!
Jennifer Groce
Post a Comment