Sunday, November 24, 2013

Discussion #6: Michelangelo's The Last Judgment


Discussion #6: Michelangelo's The Last Judgment


Smart History: Michelangelo, Last Judgment, Sistine Chapel, fresco, 1534-1541

Michelangelo, The Last Judgment, Fresco in the Sistine Chapel 1537-1541


      

     

       Michelangelo's The Last Judgment is a fresco on the altar wall of the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican. It was unveiled in October of 1541, Michelangelo completed the painting in five years time (Hall, 132). The numerous nudes inside of the chapel was very controversial. It was even during Michelangelo's lifetime that some argued the fresco should be torn down, or manipulated, “Pope Paul seriously considered having the fresco destroyed” (Hall, 189). The Pope even asked Michelangelo “to fix the nudes himself; the painter replied, “Tell the pope that it is a small matter, but let him fix the world, pictures are quickly mended” (Hall, 189). The decision to correct some of Michelangelo's errors was ordered before his death in February of 1564 (Hall, 190). It was throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that loincloths and drapery were added to the figures, some of these cover-ups were removed in the latest restoration (Hall, 190). However not all of these additions were removed because “they had become a historical part of the painting” (Hall, 190).
      These images in The Last Judgment have been argued to violate the second commandment “You shall not make for yourself any graven image” (Hall, 190). The nudity was opposed because it was “feared that it would distract and make the image ridiculous” (Hall, 192).
      Although this grand fresco ruffled a lot of people's feathers, it was one of the most widely copied and distributed paintings in Europe (Hall, 192). Because of the inexpensive medium of printmaking, a wider audience could now view the artwork. An uneducated audience laughed at the fresco rather than “being moved to devotion” (Hall, 192). It is thought that because of this change in audience (The Last Judgment was only meant for those with access to the Papal chapels) that encouraged the Church to “correct” the painting (Hall, 192).
     Marcia Hall's excerpt on Michelangelo's The Last Judgment was more factual based without much emotion behind the interpretations of the fresco. Leo Steinberg's “Michelangelo's Last Judgment as Merciful Heresy” had much more attitude and passion. Steinberg suggests that Michelangelo doubted the eternal torment of sinners and the vindictive, retributive nature of the Last Judgment – which was committing heresy in the the 1500's (3). Michelangelo's Last Judgment scene is radically different from previous and contemporary depictions in that: Christ is not seated as a judge, Christ is not angry, there are no distinctions of the angels, and no distinct separation of Heaven and Hell. Steinberg interprets the ambiguity of the composition and the emotions of the figures to be purposeful, to be based on what Michelangelo really thought of his religion in his later years. Here I have comprised a list of his arguments that back up his theory:
  1. The intent in Michelangelo's Christ is unknowable
  2. That the imperturbability of Christ's face turns all interpretation into projection
  3. That the gesture of Christ reveals a mystery, not a foregone conclusion
  4. That the Virgin is not represented as scared
  5. That the robust corporeality of the Saved expresses the meaning of Resurrection
  6. That the artist's self-portrait as empty skin signals his anxiety to partake in the Resurrection
  7. That there is no gap between Heaven and Hell
  8. That Michelangelo disbelieves in material Hell
  9. That the tumblers above are no sinners but allegories of Sin
  10. That Michelangelo's apocalyptic demography is unorthodox
  11. That the unequal sizes of the books do not express a statistical differential
  12. That the punishment in Michelangelo's fresco is not to be everlasting
  13. Theological excursus showing that Michelangelo's fresco embodies a merciful heresy
  14. That the Martyrs' supposed clamor for vengeance, being inaudible may not have been heard aright
  15. That the interpretative tradition feeds on itself, with minimal interference form the object interpreted
      I find all of Steinberg's research and arguments to be convincing. Although I cannot help but remember previous readings like “Artistic Theory in the High Renaissance” where Sir Anthony Blunt explains Michelangelo's change of faith later in life. This metamorphosis in Michelangelo's thinking was documented in his writing/poetry and in his later work. The body was no longer so important to Michelangelo, the spirit was his concern and he became very introspective. Michelangelo worried about his soul's resurrection; whether he had lead a Christ-like life that would be worthy of Heaven.
      It is with that previous article, and Steinberg's, that I wonder if Michelangelo's The Last Judgment was a sort of art therapy for the artist? Was it his way of working through the turmoil he felt throughout his long life? I'd like to believe that Michelangelo was intentional in every decision he made in this Fresco, that every lengthy interpretation by Steinberg was exactly what he was thinking and trying to say. Michelangelo was an apt thinker and gifted artist – a genius – but I doubt he would be brave enough to depict a scene worthy of heresy directly in front of the Papacy. He went into hiding once before because he feared murder, I don't believe he would ever have put himself in harms way.
      But perhaps Michelangelo knew that his Last Judgment would go directly over the church's head. ...As you can tell this argument makes me waffle in between agreeing and disagreeing. Maybe the class discussion will put me on one side or the other. 


P.S.  For your enjoyment (and mine because I am a Printmaker) I have linked to the prints/engravings mentioned at the end of Leo Steinberg's “Michelangelo's Last Judgment as Merciful Heresy” which was on page 14 of the article. Steinberg mentions the alterations found in these prints, especially the size differences of Heaven and Hell that the engravers changed from Michelangelo's original fresco. 

4 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Excellent. Thanks for the Second Life video--I note how it is totally orthodox in interpretation, unmindful of Steinberg's ideas (and 18 m long!). I like its zoomings in. And thanks for those prints! Leo Steinberg is my favorite art historian; as to your doubts I think what Mich does here is ambiguous enough to be missed by his critics, but obvious to his friends in the circle of Vittoria Colonna.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I appreciate that you outlined those 15 important bullet points- I also appreciate how you mentioned Michelangelo's change in faith as he aged. I feel like that is an important aspect to consider while looking into the Last Judgment.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you so much for sharing the list of arguments on the Last Judgment. I, too, have enjoyed your presentation on printmaking in the High Renaissance.

    ReplyDelete