vince’s ear

Along with Donatello, Alberti, and Masaccio, Filippo Brunelleschi was responsible for creating the Renaissance style in Florence in the 15th century. He is certainly the principle architect of the Renaissance and one of the most famous to come out of Florence. Little is known about the man’s early life except that he was originally trained as a goldsmith. Historians are uncertain why exactly this unlikely architect emerged from such a beginning. One story tells that he was beaten in a competition for the doors of the baptisery of the Florence Cathedral. His failure to produce a gilded bronze panel with sufficient technical skill could possibly have forced him to seek his true calling.

Filippo Brunelleschi’s first architectural commission came from the Foundling Hospital, which was part of the goldsmith guild he had belonged to. The building was made to be dignified and plain with no displays of marble or decorative inlays. It is the first building in Florence to reference classical antiquity. This style was most likely inspired from the architect’s earlier trips with his friend Donatello to ancient Rome to study the ruins.

Soon after this his work was in demand and received commissions across the board such as the dome for the Cathedral of Florence the Santa Maria del Fiore with a very large dome. The Santa Maria del Fiore posed interesting problems in that no dome of that size has been attempted with all the construction problems including scaffolding. So a commission was started to design the best dome and once again Brunelleschi faced off with his earlier rival Lorenzo Ghiberti. This time it was Brunelleschi who won. The planning and building of the dome would occupy most the remainder of Brunelleshi’s life. In the end he succeeded from a technical skill, which included inventions inspired by the republication of the Roman architect Vitruvius’ Ten Books on Architecture. Much of his success was also due to his attention to mathematical detail and knowledge of engineering.

Though architecture was his forte, Brunelleschi’s interests were varied. He not only invented practical architectural devices for buildings and construction, but other thing s as well such as a contrivance to display puppet show-like theatrical subjects in churches. He had a brief and unfortunate stint as a shipbuilder when he designed a huge ship which sank on its maiden voyage. He would be highly influential in other arts such as sculpture and painting. A polychrome wooden crucifix survives which is thought to have been completed with Donatello. Brunelleschi is supposed to have said to his friend, “Christ was most delicate in every part,” a motto in essence equating moral goodness with formal beauty which would be adopted as commonplace Renaissance theory. Painting benefited from Brunelleshi from two panels he painted which showed the first instance of placing objects in a pictorial field with a single vanishing point.

Born Alessandro di Mariano di Vanni Filipepi in 1445, the Florentine better known as Sandro Botticelli would become a leading painter in the humanist circles of Lorenzo the Magnificent. His painting Primavera (seen above) became a symbol of Lorenzo’s court, and became one of his most famous and recognized works, along with The Birth of Venus, both of which are arguably the most notable works of Renaissance Florentine art.

Taking ideas from classical secular texts, the two paintings are in true humanist form. Venus, the goddess of Love, appears as the center of attention in both paintings- the main subject in the Birth of Venus, and as part of a larger scene in Primavera. The Primavera or Allegory of Spring was painted for the cousin of Lorenzo the Magnificent, Lorenzo di Pierfransesco de’ Medici. It is designed as an appreciation of beauty and an encouragement of virtue. It is rich in complex symbolism, and can be read in part as a scene unfolding. The light characters contrast heavily against the dark background of a forest, although the idealized characters themselves show little contrast, with soft shadows characteristic of Botticelli’s style.

In the center we see an emphasized Goddess of Love, with a hovering cupid above ready to shoot an arrow of passion. The Venus is the most highly contrasted with a light gown and light red robe standing in front of a dark green bush, which contrasts with the blue midday sky beyond. This sequence of contrast is reminiscent of Leonardo’s early Florence paintings. To the far left we see a scantily clad Mercury who guards the garden with helmet, sword, and winged shoes, while pointing to touch the clouds. Next to Mercury are the three dancing figures of the three Graces, nearly naked save for transparent robes. Such garments as these, painted with very thin layers of paint mixed with linseed oil, would be considered profane and the reason many of Botticelli’s paintings were burned. The Graces are meant to be fairly seductive, and dance a rondel, while in the sights of Cupid’s bow. The Grace on the right is clearly Caterina Sforza, who appears in the portrait Catherine of Alexandria. On the right side of Venus we see a group of three figures. Zephyrus, the god of the winds, lusts after and pursues the nymph Chloris, who stumbles to the left and is transformed into Flora, the Goddess of Spring, who spreads flowers across the garden.

The highly detailed Primavera (about 150 botanical species are accurately portrayed) painted with beautiful precision and style, along with The Birth of Venus and other religious works, put Botticelli as the leader of the Florentine school. His fame at the time called for the commissions of many prominent patrons of the Medici circle including big name such as Arnolfini, Tanis, and Portinaris. He was commissioned for panels on the Sistene Chapel’s walls, which would unfortunately be shadowed by Michelangelo’s magnificent ceiling.

Botticelli’s fortune and fame would not last forever as was evident with the death of Lorenzo the Magnificent. Lorenzo’s death would affect many painters besides Botticelli and turned the Florentine culture on its head. Troublesome speakers such as the monk Girolamo Savonarola would rouse political unrest in the city. The recent years were deemed improper and immoral and the people were called on to be penitent and meditative. This resulted in the burning of books and artwork, which included several of Sandro Botticelli’s works which were deemed improper and profane. Savonarola was eventually burned at the stake himself, and his followers eventually dispersed, but the ordeal would have a profound effect and cause a nervous breakdown for our Florentine master. Still painting, though not as much, his later years show a desperation in his work. He eventually died in May, 1510.

The Spanish Inquisition is at the height of its power and witch-hunt atrocities are rampant throughout the country. Charles IV, an Italian, is King of Spain. A revolution is unfolding in France which threatens to turn the social class system upside down and to change the face of government across Europe. Meanwhile a painter works for the crown, and tries his hardest to stay out of politics and tries, as we all do, to ignore the horrors of the world and to live in peace. What could the world look like to a simple court painter, in this time and place, who was slowly going deaf?

In the beginning of “Goya’s Ghosts,” Brother Lorenzo (Javier Bardem), a leading Inquisitor, is at the Holy Office defending some of the prints by Fransisco Goya (Stellen Skarsgård) which the priests are considering vulgar. These prints portrayed witches, goblins, monstrosities, and pagan rituals- possible condoning of heretical beliefs. “The art is not evil,” defends Lorenzo, “they only portray the real world.” A few gasps are heard by the others as the monk goes on to explain that one only need look around and see the world as it truly is: horrible and unholy. Lorenzo pleads for and receives more power to weed out the heretics of society and use any means necessary to prove their unholiness.

To Goya, a painter of royal portraits and high society, life was good as long as he was paid well. His quiet world, however, would be changed as one of his favorite models (Natalie Portman) finds herself in the sights of the Church for refusing pork at an inn. This, of course, means she is a heretic and should be made to confess. After torture she confesses, as anyone would after such pain as her wealthy father points out to Lorenzo after he is invited to dinner at the rich merchant’s mansion. The father even asks Lorenzo if he would confess to being a monkey and a heretic if Lorenzo would be subject to the Church’s holy questions. As Goya laughs at such a thing, the man inquisitive of Lorenzo shows no such sense of humor.

Thus begins the turning of table after unpredictable table in this story of a poor girl who posed for Goya and found herself in Christianity’s dungeons. Having a baby in the prison, she knows the father is a certain monk, who has begged for the Church’s release of the girl to no avail. Throughout the movie we see the invasion of Emperor Napoleon’s Egyptian marmalukes- paid mercenaries who take no mercy on the Spanish populace. At the time of the French invasion the artist is completely deaf. He watches the explosions of the cannons but hears nothing.

Goya later searches for the girl in an asylum where he witnesses horrors that will become noticeable in some of his later works. Remaining neutral and simply trying to make a living, the former court painter watches regimes rise and fall from Charles IV, to Joseph Bonaparte, then the British forces under Duke Wellington. We see inquisitors turned prisoners, then priests again; we see the rich end up in rags, and the rags end up in riches. Will the poor girl survive Catholicism? What will become of the disgraced monk who confessed to being a monkey and a heretic? Will the terrifying events of an aged lifetime cause a genius to go mad, and create brutally dark masterpieces such as Colossus?

I really liked this movie and thought it was very suspenseful, dark yet humorous, and overall well written and directed. Don’t expect a complete biography on Goya, but do expect plenty of shots of many of his masterpieces. I’m glad it wasn’t just a total look at his life, as sometimes there could use a bit more story than simple biographies. Rather this movie lets the whole landscape of Spain at the turn of the 19th century unfold with its political and religious climate.

Every actor did a perfect job for his/her role, even Randy Quaid who played Charles IV. A critic asked if someone could believe such a portrayal. I’m a bit puzzled. I’m sure it was a put down for Quaid, but even if this was true I think they were misinformed. Charles IV wanted to be perceived as a powerful monarch but in truth was not, only a figurehead hiding behind the queen. Look at the buffoons we vote into office today. Parallels are made elsewhere as Napoleon’s generals motivate the French invaders by promising to be met as liberators, when this couldn’t be further from the truth. Say what you like, but the truth is the same today as it was back then. With political candidates literally saying they don’t care what the people want, and promising a century of pointless wars, after entering the new millennium with a ridiculous war, I believe Goya hit the nail on the head when he portrayed humanity as the two men in quicksand beating each other (see below).

Coming from the director of Amadeus you can expect an excellent soundtrack with Spanish guitars in some scenes, and bagpipes of the advancing British troops in one shot, as well as music for an excellent montage of paintings in the end. Randy Quaid even gives a little violin solo! But it’s not that good- you’ll see what I mean.

In summary, don’t believe the critics (who does, anyway?) and watch this film. It’s good for history buffs as well as art buffs. Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men) really steals the show as Lorenzo with a fantastic performance. It’s full of irony and just downright entertaining. We witness a world full of atrocities which are no different than the world we live in today. Goya’s ghosts are just as likely to be the same as yours or mine.

Goya’s Ghosts (2006) **** 1/2

The 10 Scariest Paintings: #1, Saturn Devouring His Children

Widely considered to have expressed the most of the ideals of the High Renaissance, Raphael’s talent was truly a force to be reckoned with, and competed with his much older contemporaries Leonardo and Michelangelo. Like the other men, Raphael was trained in several disciplines to include painting as well as sculpting, and receiving a humanist education.

The delicate grace with which he portrays the Madonna in the Madonna of the Chair shows a mastery of painterly skill. It shows Mary, the Mother of Jesus who she holds, with Jesus’ cousin Saint John the Baptist wearing contemporary clothes in an elegant chair. It depicts a mother and child well at ease and comfortable, and invites the viewer to feel the same. This is different from Leonardo who often portrayed people with a deep complexity, and Michelangelo whose powerful subjects were far from at ease. He also differed in personality. While the other two artists were solitary people, Raphael was known to be quite sociable and well liked.

Pope Julius II would call on Raphael to come to Rome in 1508, where he stayed for the rest of his life. There he was commissioned to decorate the walls of the Stanze in the Vatican, and he completed his most prized work, “The School of Athens” (see above). The popularity of the work in the Vatican put Raphael’s work in such high demand that many of his paintings from then on were executed by assistants. In his later years, he was wholly responsible for many of his portraits, with subtle beauty that rivals those of Leonardo. His work after the Vatican “Raphael Rooms” would later lay the foundations for Mannerism, depicted the ideals of Christianity with the grace of Classical times. Raphael is one of the most influential Renaissance artists and is considered by many to be the greatest painter of all time.