Intro to Research Project: Raphael, Dürer, and Marcantonio Raimondi: Copying and the Renaissance Print

Raphael, Dürer, and Marcantonio Raimondo: Copying and the Renaissance Print

        Printmaking is a medium, that inherently, is mass producible. Artist's use matrices, or plates, such as wood or metal that are inked up and then offset onto paper. This offset can be done by hand or with a press. In the beginning printmaking was a tool to bring images to a wider audience; whether in “illustrating books and pamphlets or as independent images” (Hartt, 36). The invention of the Gutenberg press was soon found in many major Italian cities: Rome in 1467, Venice in 1469, Florence by 1471, and over seventy other cities by the end of the 1400's (Hartt, 36). The widespread use of the press throughout Italy in the Renaissance created many business opportunities for copyists or printmakers.

        Prints, since their creation, have always been more reasonably priced than paintings or sculptures due to their ability to create more than one of the same image. In the fifteenth century prints were “created for the middle and lower classes” (Hartt, 220). Many of these prints were reproductions/copies of other artist's works, not the printmaker's original designs or concepts. Most professional artists of the quarttrocento believed these masters of reproductions to be just artisans (Hartt, 220). The “earliest reproductive print made after a Renaissance painting” is attributed to Giovanni Pietro da Birago with his engraving “Last Supper, after Leonardo da Vinci” 1500 (Hartt, 462).

Giovanni Pietro da Birago “Last Supper, after Leonardo da Vinci” 1500

Leonardo da Vinci "The Last Supper"1495–1498

This print was done soon after the completion of the painting, and because of it art historians can study the original arrangement of the feet (which are now lost) (Hartt. 462). Print reproductions enhance and answer questions of the past, as well as give us insight into the collaboration between printmaker and artist.

        I will be focusing on the Italian printmaker or engraver Marcantonio Raimondi (1480-1534) and his relationships with famous German printmaker Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528) and famous High Renaissance Italian painter Raphael (1483-1520). Topics will cover the importance of copyists and their influence on the art of the day, the relationship between designer and printmaker, and the issue of copyright or intellectual property.

 Albrecht Dürer

Marcantonio Raimondi

Raphael
 

Bibliography:

Hartt, Fredrick and David G. Wilkins. The History of Italian Renaissance Art. Upper Saddle River:    

     Pearson Education, 2011. Print.

Lincoln, Evelyn. The Invention of the Italian Renaissance Printmaker. Singapore: Yale University 

     Press, 2000. Print.

Pon, Lisa. Raphael, Durer, and Marcantonio Raimondi: Copying and the Renaissance Print. China: 

     Yale University Press, 2004. Print

Discussion 4: Artistic Theory in the High Renaissance

 Artistic Theory in the High Renaissance: Leonardo compared to Michelangelo

Sir Anthony Blunt, Artistic Theory in Italy (pp. 23-38, 58-81)

         It is acceptable to say that Leonardo and Michelangelo begin as scientists in art, and rely on the sciences in order to formulate their works. Both were raised in the Humanist era and therefore studied the arts and sciences. Foundations in linear perspective and accurate proportion developed a standard for accuracy in art. The exactitude of the portrayal of 'man' came only through much schooling and personal study (dissection). Leonardo and Michelangelo had much of the same upbringing; being apprenticed to great artists and eventually surpassing them significantly in skill and theory. Beyond their similar roots these two great artists of the Renaissance formulate different ideas of what art is, and how it should be depicted and thought of.

         Leonardo judges art by its completeness of rendering nature (Blunt, 27). “For leonardo, painting is a science because of its foundation on mathematical perspective and on the study of nature” (Blunt, 26). Through Leonardo's words one can see how he judges other artist's for not being at the same skill level as himself. Leonardo has

“...a particular scorn for those who ignore theory and think that by mere practice they can produce a work of art: 'Those who devote themselves to practice without science are like sailors who put to sea without rudder or compass and who can never be certain where they are going. Practice must always be founded on sound theory.' He also disapproves of those who rely on devices for exact imitation, like Alberti's net for the method of painting on a piece of glass held in front of the view. These short-cuts should only be used by those who have enough knowledge of theory” (28).

He believes that one can only truly be a true master of realism, of accuracy of nature, with study and underlying understanding of the subject; a true traditional master. This obsession, or thirst, for perfection is apparent due to the numerous amount of notebooks Leonardo filled throughout his lifetime. Leonardo judged his own artwork by the exactness that it imitated real life or nature. He used a mirror to check life-likeness, and “the reflection in a mirror as 'the true painting'” (Blunt, 30). This mirror method is still used by artists today.

         For through all of Leonardo's obsession with understanding how the world worked, he became a genius before his time. “His knowledge of human anatomy was not attained by members of the medical profession for half a century after his death, and many of the facts which he observed had to wait still longer before they could be properly fitted into man's scheme of the universe” (Blunt, 25). Perhaps because of his studies, Leonardo comes to conclusions about what is the greatest art, “Leonardo maintains that painting is the finer art, [not poetry], because 'it makes images of the works of nature with more truth than the poet'” (Blunt, 27). The same idea comes out when Leonardo claims superiority for painting over sculpture because “the latter cannot use color, or aerial perspective, or depict luminous or transparent bodies, clouds, storms, and many other things” (Blunt, 27). It is known that Leonardo and Michelangelo disliked each other. One can only imagine Leonardo says these things against poetry and sculpture so that Michelangelo, who was foremost a sculpture and privately a poet, would hear them or that their social circle or contemporaries would know how Leonardo felt. Leonardo felt that the most beautiful and successful of art was that which could allude the most exactly to real life.

         Contrastingly, Michelangelo, by the end of his life does not believe that art should be the “exact imitation of nature” (Blunt, 61). Michelangelo was not just trained in Humanism, but also Neoplatonism, which “spoke of spiritual beauty” (Blunt, 61). His training in Neoplatonism “led to a belief in the beauty of the visible universe, above all in human beauty” (Blunt, 60). To Michelangelo, beauty (especially in the depiction of man) was a reflection of the divine (Blunt, 62).

Unlike Leonardo, Michelangelo was an extremely devout man. He wrote a poem that said, “nowhere does God, in his grace, reveal himself to me more clearly than in lovely human form, which I love solely because it is a mirrored image of Himself” (Blunt, 69). This explains his attention to the male figures in his artwork, as well as the masculinity of his females, because men are the likeness of God in Michelangelo's eyes. One can see this especially with the Sibyls in the Sistine Chapel fresco (1508-12), which is “a worship of the beauty of the human body” (Blunt, 60).

         Many years later Michelangelo paints “The Last Judgement” in the Sistine Chapel (1536-41) and one can compare this fresco to the ceiling and see that, “physical beauty is not the most important but the portrayal of the soul is what occupies Michelangelo's thoughts” (Blunt, 66). Michelangelo became consumed with getting into heaven, wrought with emotion of whether his soul was good enough to avoid damnation. His thoughts became that “love of physical beauty is a cheat, but the true love, that of spiritual beauty, gives perfect satisfaction, does not fade with time, and elevates the mind to the contemplation of the divine” (Blunt, 67).

         Michelangelo's artistic theory concludes that physical portrayal of beauty is not as important to the portrayal of spiritual beauty. This might be why many of his sculptures, like those in the Medici Tombs, have unfinished faces. This unfinished quality might have meant something to Michelangelo and his relationship with God that onlookers won't ever comprehend. Leonardo also had many unfinished artworks in his lifetime, but these were probably not intentional. His artistic theory was that art should imitate life's beauty exactly; which can only be accomplished by a thorough study of the sciences and only truly through painting. Leonardo said to “never imitate another painter, or you will be their 'grandson' and and not a son of nature in your art” (Blunt, 33). This is because this copying leads to Mannerism. Leonardo disapproved of Mannerism because “it was away from the real nature of things” (Blunt, 33). It is because of Michelangelo and his theories and depictions in art, not Leonardo's, that the Renaissance leads into Mannerism. Despite their similar roots, these two artists arrived at very different opinions on what art should be.

…This begins the debate of which great Master had a more profound influence on the art world then and now?

Prints & Pots + Bling

The Facebook event page is here: https://www.facebook.com/events/545516115503866/

Please tell your friends! It's the best event of the semester ;)

If you have questions you can leave them in the comments. 

Discussion 3: Readings on Rome and its culture

Discussion 3: Readings on Rome and its culture

Ingrid D. Rowland “Cultural Introduction to Renaissance Rome” Rome pp. 1-13

&

Loren Partridge “Patronage and the Popes: Saints or Sinners?” The Art of the Renaissance in Rome pp. 8-17

       Both of these readings explain the rise of Rome due to the inalienable right of the Popes, sanctioned by God to reside and reign there. Loren Partridge tells us that “in transferring his (Emperor Constantine's) capital to Constantinople, it was believed that Constantine donated the city of Rome, the western empire, and the imperial regalia to the pope, although already in 1440 Lorenzo Valla (1407-57) had demonstrated the document recording this famous donation to be an eighth-century forgery” (15). Glancing over this minor fallacy, popedom kept calm and carried on with it's pursuit of Rome and overall became a success and a major reason why the Renaissance occurred. “When the popes returned permanently to Rome in the early fifteenth century, the city began to grow and prosper” (Patrdige, 16).

      As Ingrid Rowland blatantly states “what actually fueled the Renaissance in Rome, was money” (5). Also the idea of Rome as the sanctioned city of God powered the Renaissance, for without the power and money of the popes the Renaissance would not have happened. “For Martin V, patriotic Roman pope, the idea of Rome as head of the church gained a gloriously timeless perspective with its fifteenth-century reinvention: This was the moment that gave life to the idea of Rome as Eternal City, not for a season but for all time” (Rowland, 2). The Eternal City and the pope's powering it guide the Renaissance with a mainly Humanist ideal.

     “Rome lagged behind until the mid-fifteenth century” (Rowland, 3). It is in the fifteenth century that rebuilding the city (it had been sacked numerous times) became of great importance to the papacy and humanists. “The rebuilders believe that their work of restoration answered the call of God. The urgent image of rebirth that underpins the very idea of the Renaissance (not to mentions the term itself) was forged, not in Florence, but in Rome-- and when that rebirth was conceived, its audacity was staggering” (Rowland, 4). The rebuilders of Rome recognize the importance of rebirth in the thoughts and practices of their forefathers. “For them (humanists), the ruins of the Eternal City seemed to reveal traces of God's plan just as clearly as they laid bare the details of ancient construction methods” (Rowland, 4). The humanists and scholar-popes begin to study and encourage the lost antiquities. To humanist artists of the fifteenth century “and their contemporaries, the Columns and statues strewn among the ruins seemed to encode a secret lore of perfect proportion, known to the ancients and lost in the later eras, a perfection based on harmony with the human body” (Rowland, 4). Through the reconstruction and revival of Rome; artists, architects, and others regained lost knowledge, and then were able to add to it. Actually because of this rebirth (the Renaissance!), “the city of the popes, from the fifteenth century onward, classical style became the preferred instrument for spreading a gospel” (Rowland, 9).

       Money catapults Rome to a higher status as Rowland states that, “in the fifteenth into the sixteenth century Rome's economic standing began to improve dramatically as popes invested huge sums of money in tangible improvements for the city” (6). Humanist educations must have encouraged the preservation and public study of ancient texts because educated popes like Nicholas V began the first papal library. “Nicholas V, elected in 1447 understood with particular clarity that art, architecture and city planning could do their own part to advance the image of Rome as the papacy's proper, divinely sanctioned home” (Rowland 9). Nicholas V, provided the first nucleus for an official, public Vatican Library just like the Ancient roman libraries of the collections of Alexandria and Pergamon that were so famous. It was “a library of all books both in Latin and Greek that was worthy of the dignity of the Pope” (Rowland, 9). After a brief stint of non-activity with adding to the library, in 1475 the library was re-started by scholar-pope Sixtus IV. “Sixtus made it clear that like Nicholas before him, this growing collection of books was an essential element in any grand plan for the city's spiritual and physical renewal” (Rowland, 10). Rowland believes that “in a real sense, the library served as the brain of the Renaissance Rome, its articulate memory and its nerve center” (10). The Humanist ideal of public knowledge was encouraged and endowed by the papacy due to the construction of this public library. “Pope Sixtus ordered that Greek authors be translated from Greek to Latin so that their works would be available to a greater number of readers; in this sense, too, the library truly lived up to its designation as an apostolic institution, an explicit instrument of Christian mission” (Rowland, 10). It is known that “from 1475 onward, the Vatican Library's importance to Renaissance Rome would remain fundamental, [due] in part for the richness of its holdings” (Rowland, 11).

      Popes came and went, and with these rotating regimes came changing ideas and ideals. Artists and architects depended on the patronage of the popes, but also were able to gather and begin new ideas. One idea (that remains today) from this time period is that of The Academy, which would teach the arts (instead of apprenticeships). “The prelates, artists, bankers, and courtiers who depended on the papacy for their livelihood learned to adapt quickly to changing regimes; at the same time, they maintained a certain degree of diffuse independence from the city's one dominant figure by forming their own associations; learned academies, religious confraternities, gatherings of friends” (Rowland, 6).

      The papacy's determination to make Rome the capitol of their religious empire was essential to the Renaissance. These powerful popes were raised and educated in a Humanist way, and therefore had a great sense of civic pride. This lead to the reconstruction of Roman antiquities and the preference of the arts resembling the classical. In order for the artists and scholars of the period to incorporate these ideas, a public library was erected by the papacy to instill ancient knowledge upon them. According to Rowland this library served as the nervous center or brain of the city. The money and sanctions the church threw into revitalizing Rome literally helped coin the term “Renaissance”. Essentially from the readings I took to understand that without the power and money from the papacy in Rome, along with humanist educations and ideals, the Renaissance probably would not have happened. Great things rarely happen without the backing of large sums of money.

A question:

In the fifteenth century, did “they” refer to the time already as The Renaissance? Or is that a term only used in hindsight?

Discussion #2: Pgs: 410-453 Leonardo da Vinci: Flights of the Mind

Discussion #2: Leonardo da Vinci: Flights of the Mind

Charles Nicholl pages: 410-453 (Part Seven, Return to Milan: 1506-1513)

“good day, master francesco…”

Brothers at Ward

Dissections

Back in the Studio

The World and Its Waters

Fetes Milanaises

La Cremona

The ‘Medical Schools’

Chez Melzi

Portrait of the Artist at Sixty

The series of pages I read from Charles Nicholl’s “Leonardo da Vinci: Flights of the Mind” reconstructs Leonardo da Vinci’s life from 1506 to 1513. Leonardo was born in 1452 and died in 1519, so the age of Leonardo in this period is 54 to 61.

Nicholl’s writing evokes deep reverence for Leonardo and passioned research into Leonardo da Vinci’s life. The quotes he finds of Leonardo’s are sometimes funny and quirky, which made me feel like I was really in the mindset of this genius of the Renaissance. This particular passage about Leonardo writing his assistant, Francesco Melzi, a letter from Florence in 1508 absolutely made me smile:

“Good day, Master Francesco,

Why in god’s name have you not answered a single one of all the letters I’ve sent you. You just wait till I get there and by God I’ll make you write so much you’ll be sorry.” (411)

Throughout reading, I couldn’t help but place myself into Leonardo’s life, I think it is just the literary style of Nicholl’s. This book was packed full of interesting facts and stories I never imagined could have survived history.

Nicholl’s begins “Part Seven, Return to Milan” with the introduction of a pupil of Leonardo’s, the aristocrat Francesco Melzi who was probably fourteen years old when he joined Leonardo’s in the early part of 1507. Melzi was a primary scribe to Leonardo. Nicholl’s tells us “it is Melzi we must thank for the survival of so many of Leonardo’s manuscripts” (410). From here Nicholl’s remarks on how Vasari insinuates a homosexual relationship between the two, although there really is no evidence.

Later in 1507, Leonardo must travel from Milan to go to Florence (unbeknownst to him, his last visit to the city before his death) because of a lawsuit with his brothers over his beloved Uncle Francesco’s last will and testament (413). The lawsuit was filed because Leonardo was technically illegitimate (413). The issue was not documented as resolved.

I noticed throughout the section I read that Leonardo gets victimized frequently on the money he is owed, whether it’s his own family or the patrons of his art. Perhaps this was common for every artist in the 1500’s. For example there might have been a third version painted of London’s ‘Madonna of the Rocks’. This is because the Confraternity who commissioned the painting refused to pay in full. They suggested Leonardo and his assistants copy the painting to sell in order to make the rest of their money. There is no evidence that this third version was ever created however.

Throughout the text, Leonardo’s notebooks are frequently referred to. Even the fact that Bill Gates owns the Codex of Leicester which is “the most unified of Leonardo’s notebooks” (416). The Codex of Leicester is primarily about geophysics and cosmology but according to Nicholl’s was “not really groundbreaking material” (417). In other notebooks he talks of water and surface tension and “how the flight of a bird through air must be like swimming underwater” at the ‘falls’ which are still there today in Weir Florence (418).

I really loved hearing Leonardo da Vinci’s inner dialogue through the quotes of his notebooks. I also found it fascinating how prolific he was with these journals. Such as “Of the World and its Waters” which was written from the 12th of September 1508 through October 1508 with 192 full pages (431). Apparently Leonardo always imagined compiling these notes into one grand and organized manuscript, but as Nicholl’s pointed out earlier in the book Leonardo abandoned things “as easily as he abandoned pictures” so this complete manuscript never came to fruition.

The chapter on dissections was the most fascinating for me. In a dissection of a two year old versus an old man Leonardo finds “everything to be the opposite of that of the old man” (419). These revelations on how the human body works might have been the first discoveries of their kind, no matter how simple. He wrote notes to go along with all his anatomical drawings, usually comparing human parts to plants and other various analogies. He drew a study of the female genitalia and of the anal-sphincter in 1508-9 and said this:

“ the wrinkles or ridges in the folds of the vulva have indicated to us the location of the gatekeeper of the castle” (421)

Leonardo da Vinci, Female Genitalia and Studies of the Anal-Sphincter 1508-9

This now humorous analogy and crude drawing, is the musing of Leonardo discovering and investigating something completely unstudied in the past due to using cadavers. Leonardo describes the challenges, indeed horrors, of the task (dissection with no refrigeration!) “you-the reader, the would-be anatomist- ‘will perhaps be deterred by the rising of your stomach” (422).

Most of this licensed dissection was probably done at the Santa Maria Nuova hospital (422). But he probably dissected at his studio/home too. Dissection was still controversial and considered by some to be black arts and medieval magic (422). Leonardo bluntly scribbles in a notebook his opinion on people who believe or study in such magic “...most idiotic of all, necromancers and sorcerers” (423). Leonardo reveres understanding the body, and the dissections method increases his knowledge of how the body really works. He wrote:

“True knowledge of the shape of any body is arrived at by seeing it from different aspects. Thus to express the true shape of any limb of a man… I will observe the aforesaid rule, making 4 demonstrations for the 4 sides of each limb. And for the bones I will make 5, cutting them in half and showing the hollow of each of them, of which one is full of marrow, and the other spongy or empty or solid” (445).

This quote proves Leonardo’s ferocity in studying anatomy and the drawings are the “service of truth rather than of some ideal beauty”(445). As a true humanist, Leonardo was always a lifelong learner. He estimated that he had done over twenty dissections, but still he wanted to know more. However, later in Rome he was in conflict with the church over these dissections and was “hindered in anatomy” (423). Leonardo writes “the imperative of investigation is always stronger than that of personal comfort or doctrinal safety” which suggests he may not have heeded the warning (423).

At this point in the reading there was more conjecture on Leonardo’s sex life. Researches flip flop between his sexual orientation. Romances are speculated between his male pupil Salai and Melzi and perhaps a courtesan or prostitute named Maria Cremonese “la cremona” who also might have been a model for his lost painting ‘Leda’ (440). Although these findings are interesting, I couldn’t help but think of this history as gossip, or something you would find on the cover of a celebrity magazine like People.

Much more intriguing was finding out that Nicholl’s considers Leonardo's self-portrait done is red chalk from 1512 to be misleading. Nicholl’s states “he is too old [for it] to be an accurate depiction of Leonardo at sixty or sixty-one, it’s more of a self-caricature, than a self-portrait”(451). The most accurate depiction of Leonardo da Vinci is of that by his pupil Melzi ‘Leonardo in Late Middle Age’ 1510-1512 done in profile with sanguine drawing material.

  

 Leonardo da Vinci, Self Portrait 1512

Francesco Melzi, Leonardo in Late Middle Age 1510-1512

Overall I found the selected passage I read to be enthralling. Perhaps this is only because Leonardo da Vinci was an abnormally fascinating man. Nicholl’s exhaustive research was believable so much so that he allows himself to speculate on aspects of Leonardo’s life. For example Nicholl’s summarizes Leonardo’s “fondness for hats” (453). It is this type of candor mixed with factual knowledge that makes me want to read “Leonardo da Vinci: Flights of the Mind”  in it’s entirety.

Other random quotes I enjoyed:

“Leonardo enjoyed the imagination’s power to construct meanings out of randomness -- He wrote of seeing the stains on a wall as beautiful landscapes.” (451)
“Among these big theme there is also that quality of momentariness which is such a pungent aspect of the notebooks. Here are some of the phrases scribbled down on the cover:

    inflate the lungs of a pig

    Avicenna on fluids

    map of Elefan of India which Antonello Merciaio has

    enquire at the stationers’ for Vitruvius

    ask Maestro Mafeo why the Adige rises for seven years and falls for seven years

    go every Saturday to the hot baths and you will see naked men.” (433)


P.S. if you haven't seen Futurama's "The Duh-Vinci Code" I highly recommend it. Here is a clip

Discussion #1: Humanism

Humanism was the study of ancient Roman and Greek literature. The roman empire ended roughly in 470 A.D. while ancient Greece ended approximately 30 B.C. Humanism was an important step into the Renaissance period which was roughly the 14th through the 17th century.

Martines explains that "Humanism was an education ideal"(192). A humanist education explored such things as poetry, science, philosophy, grammar, and natural science, or as we refer to them now "the Humanities". An education in this discipline relied heavily on the use of Latin and with that the application of grammar. Humanists were expected to write and discuss critically so as to practice the art of persuasion. Humanists wanted the ruling class to be more open minded and "modernize their outlook" from their medieval or dark age backgrounds (Martines, 195). Humanism was to help the student become more "worldly" and to emphasis the human potential for achievement.

Humanism was not "meant for the urban community at large, instead it looked to practical life in society and it was meant for those destined to hold leading social positions" (Martines, 192). Exclusively educating the privileged could not be avoided "because of [humanism's] necessary insistence upon long years of study" (Martines, 199). Being educated like this was as Martines describes a "preparation for life: a life of study and public service rather than mere money making" (199). The mindset was to instill knowledge unto the rulers of the time who would have the wealth and power to change their cities. Theoretically, leaders who studied humanism would then be advocates for the betterment of their cities.

Through these emphases and ideals the Renaissance scholar was born. Scholars "found an ideal which could be turned into a recipe for cultivated men of the world, a recipe for ruling classes" (Martines, 196). This recipe of higher life-long learning, rhetoric, and civic pride laid the foundation for the Italian Renaissance. Humanists brought education out of the dark ages by looking back upon the fore-fathers of their nation. The art world of the time steps out of it's predecessor's ideals and themes and grows substantially. Renaissance art will take more risks, look more natural, and have greater dimension all due to studying historic texts.

Hello!

Alright, I am stepping into the blogosphere world. Here's hoping this all goes smoothly.

-Christa C.