Author: nranit20

In the class we analyzed and discussed Matthias Grunewald’s Insenheim Altarpiece. Here again the importance of context within the renaissance art is raised again. This altarpiece is commissioned for a monastery where monks take care of people with ergotism, a skin disease. Another thing a modern viewer must be aware is that Matthias was not interested in Italian renaissance, but profoundly Germanic. The altarpiece is dedicated to St. Anthony Abbot, as the monks were of Anthonite order (btw Ergotism was known as St. Anthony’s fire in these times).

Grunewald’s expressionist style is what astonished me the most and had the biggest impact on me. The way that he used St. Anthony’s temptations (Saints who the incurable sick people were praying to) to strengthen the faith of the patients, by using expressionist and extremely illicit figures talks a lot about artist’s creativity and ability to identify the crucial elements of the story he is trying to tell and the perfect technique used to do so. Grunewald distorted images with purpose to convey emotion, something frequent in Germanic art, but extremely innovative for the era. Grunewald tried to teach the patients how to die, by using inspiration against pride, as Christians believed devil would come to tempt one right before death so there is no time for remorse.

In the central panel of the second view the contrast of New and Old Testimony was done so effortlessly and without poking one’s eye, but also noticeable. The artist even managed to demonstrate the bias and negative thoughts one should have towards the Jewish part (via dirty vessel). These, on the first sight irrelevant details, are what makes the renaissance artwork special to me, apart from aesthetic side of it. So many layers with so many different meanings all working toward the same direction and doctrine.

Portinari altarpiece is a triptych portraying the Adoration of Shepards, commissioned for Hospital of Santa Maria Nuova in Florence. The symbolism and attention to detail that created numerous layers of this altarpiece made it stand out to me. In one of the rare cases we have Christ almost defenseless in the center of the painting in the central panel. He is laid down on a sheaf of wheat, which is literally the meaning of the word Bethlehem, the town where Jesus was born.The cow and a donkey used in the first panel are brought in the central one as well, not only to continue the story, but so the viewer through the contrast in their behavior (one is eating the second is looking up) shows the difference between Christians and Jewish people, who failed to recognize the importance of the moment and Christ as Son of God. The piece uses so much detail and symbolism that even the flowers and vases in the bottom of the central panel have a deeper meaning. Blue iris represents royalty, white iris purity of Virgin Mary and red lilies the passion of Christ (foreshadowing). Even the vase is decorated with grapes representing the blood of Christ. The glass containing flowers is transparent, promoting Churches’ theory that if light can go through a glass and not shatter it, so can Virgin Mary give birth ti Christ and remain a virgin. Finally, almost an invisible detail was added by Hugo. Behind a colon and above the cow, devil is painted lurking in the darkness.

It is interesting to see that priests are not in the painting itself, either suggesting that the priest should be standing in front of it, including the piece into the mass itself or that baby Jesus represents a priest. I find it extremely impressive that artists being limited with the technology of those times, managed to add details that were invisible to human eye until modern days. They also had such knowledge of composition as well as religion to seemingly with such ease incorporate so many different symbols and meanings while all of them working together to form a complete painting, whose meaning, just as a painting itself, is composed out of all of these parts.

In this week we started exploring the Northern renaissance and its altars. We talked about the way Norther renaissance artists used Arma Christi to show the passion of Christ and recreate the scene where the specific objects were used in order to evoke emotion. The difference in perspective and artistic expression influenced through religious beliefs can also be seen in the way artists showed Christ’s tomb. In Northern art, Jesus is put in sarcofagus, which metaphorically represented the altar itself. On the other hand, in Esaster Christianity rock covering the cave was usually used to depict Christ’s tomb.

One of the altarpieces we focused on was Van Eyck’s Ghent Altarpiece. Widely considered a masterpiece, this altarpiece followed the Northern tradition of being able to open and close. As the altarpieces were opened only on special occasion, the inner panels are much more vibrant in color contrasting the panels in the closed view. This made the event when the piece was opened even more sacred and special to viewer. Also, it was impressive to me how the artist managed to vertically include the central classical Deesis arrangement of God, across panels in different sections, metaphorically showing Christ’s sacrifice by painting Agnus Dei. The piece had me thinking about the effect a layered and creative piece could have in religious purposes as well, showing that art was done for a different purpose than for the sake of art itself.

Usually mentioned as one of the most underrated altarpieces of Norther art is van der Weyden’s Entombment. What makes it special is the way it shows suffering (passion) with the goal of waking compassion in the viewer, an extremely important concept in Christianity. Compassion was considered a relationship between two equals, thus, through compassion of Virgin Mary towards Christ and a viewer towards Virgin Mary, one felt closer to God Himself.

In the class we discussed different depictions of Virgin Mary and the way that artists shifted the way of painting. We noticed how the paintings became volumetric, giving them a more naturalistic, true to life style. What I found specifically interested is how the artists used the supposed viewer’s knowledge of religious content to lead through the panels in a boustrophedon way. One usually thinks of rigidity when talking about religious art, so it always excites me to see how artists managed to be innovative and creative while heavily directed at the same time. It made me think of my exhibition and its possible options. How do I want to use the viewer’s context in order to lead them through the exhibition?

What caught my attention above the actual transition in style of altar-pieces during the renaissance is the comparison of late Medieval style to Cubism. When we think of Cubism, we think of a recent, modern and extremely innovative almost eccentric style, brought to fame by Picasso. Yet to think that in the nonsecular states in Medieval times artists used similar style to depict the most divine and sacred figures surprised me. I think it goes to show that art does not actually follow regular chronological path, which also relates to the critique of Vasari’s book, because art reinvents and “revives” itself in different but similar forms constantly.

While reading the “Contract of Enguerrand Quarton with Dominus Jean de Montagnac” and “Enguerrand Quartern’s “Coronation of the Virgin'” critical essay by prof. Plesch the amount of control patrons had over the artwork shocked me. So many details and parts of the composition are predetermined, while artist is given freedom in some parts, but according to his own religious knowledge as well. Thus, even when patron allows for artistic expression, one has to account for the religious boundaries of a given subject, such as the Holy Trinity or Coronation of the Virgin. It is difficult to realize that apart from the technical knowledge, together with the great adaptability and capability to make a liable composition out of great number of requests, the artists also had to be familiar in-depth with the subject of their piece in order to even be considered for it. With “loss” of the patrons, I believe that modern artists enjoy more freedom, as they choose their own themes, modes, application etc.

Being from Serbia that is predominantly Orthodox Christian, I have lived with frescos my entire life. Yet, rarely have I thought about them as just art, it was of greater historical, religious importance to the society. It is interesting to draw parallels between fresco art in Eastern and Western Christianity, but also to see art literally become a part of the building it should help bring to life. Finally, as I studied Diego Rivera’s work and the work of other Latin American, especially Mexican, avant-garde artists, it was great to remember that fresco technique does not have to be tied to religion at all. For them it helped express their manifesto and aid in creation of a new, post-colonial national identity.

I was intrigued how due to Giorgio Vasari’s book, artist started to matter more. We can see that today as well with labels firstly showing us the name of the artist. Moreover, something that Vasari started and continues to this day is that fame (name recognition) helps in art appreciation as well. Thus, when he wrote about Florentine artists they were widely recognized, became prominent and consequently seen as the greatest of their time, or ever. Today, we can see that the worth of an art piece increases in value when its creator passes, suggesting that publicity together with limited supply (no other artwork will be created by that person) impacts the value of the work, not only its artistic value.

Having read the first chapter of the Renaissance Art, and discovering about Goethe’s experience, I also expected a spiritual, almost religious endeavor. Even though the lightning and the overall quite, personal atmosphere brings mystique and adds to the admiration potential of the art itself, I did not feel even remotely spiritually touched as Goethe has. This might be because we nowadays have gone to many more museums of all kinds, sometimes in large groups, so we lost the a part of the ability to truly appreciate the novelty, technique and overall importance and impact art can have. However, I think that having more work of arts depicting the same theme made me realize difference in artistic perspectives and their influence on the viewers experience, which contrasts usual chronological exhibitions, that tend to, probably accidentally, make me compare and rate artists among themselves instead of appreciating each for what they bring.