Fall of Phaeton, Rise of Ricci

     I decided to research and analyze Sebastiano Ricci’s painting Fall of Phaeton. Sebastiano Ricci practiced his craft in the late 17th early 18th century in Venice. His work had a sense of Rococo or late Baroque style with its asymmetrical compositions, curved lines and intense perspectives.What initially attracted my attention to Ricci was the detail and intense motion of his work. The movement he was able to capture in his paintings brought out the drama of the stories and really hinted at the early Baroque style that was still lingering in Ricci’s technique. The painting Fall of Phaeton is a prime example where the motion and perspective of the composition is exaggerated to an extreme and really brings out the tension in the work. This is more then a simply aesthetically beautiful painting. It is a wonderful representation of one of my favorite stories of Greek mythology.

     The painting depicts Phaeton the son of the sun-god Helios. Helios was responsible for driving his four horse, golden chariot (the sun) across the sky daily. Phaeton convinced his skeptic father to let him drive the sun across the sky for one day, but without the skill needed Phaeton was soon in trouble. Sebastiano’s painting conveys the climatic moment of this trouble when Phaeton loses the reins of his horses and control of the chariot, putting the earth in danger of catching fire. A thunderbolt is sent by Zeus to kill Phaeton and prevent earth from being destroyed. The highlights and shadows of this piece is what really attracted me at first glance. It is almost as if the viewer is the light source, everything is illuminated directly in front and the shadows intensify as the forms recede into the background giving the audience center stage in the divine story.

      Being half Greek myself I have always had an interest in Greek mythology and this has become a favorite story of mine, not because of the story so much but the painting that I now found to accompany it.

This painting is what I see as a perfect depiction of the original Myth and the perspective of the chariot falling and Phaeton tumbling out is amazing to me. While this Myth has been translated into paintings before Ricci’s time and after, none of them show the bright realism that I see in Ricci’s work.

      It was painted between 1703-04 with oil on canvas. It is one of the only depictions I saw that was close up and clear to the drama of the story. I find it amazing and daring the angles that Phaeton used, if Zeus was taken out of this painting it would be difficult to understand witch way is up and down. The horses are painted at such extreme positions it is amazing they still read as real. The realism of not only the horses but the body of Phaeton and the perspective in witch they fall is amazing to me. The soft mix of warm colors in the middle of the painting surrounded by very faint cool colors of the sky keep the viewers attention in on the characters and reveal the tension that had just taken place or is taking place at that very moment. It was very difficult to find scholarly descriptions and interpretations of this painting but I feel as if it quite literal to the story. This is one of the reasons I chose this painting, It is not so much a mystery with hidden meanings but a very good depiction of a very important Greek myth that teaches us not to overreach our own skill level. And if we do, hopefully we are able to stop our over confident selves before we set fire to our world.

David, Before and After

The Baroque movement brought out the drama in the art of its time. Unlike renaissance art, the baroque style brought about the depiction of the most intense moment of a given scenario, while still holding on to some of the renaissance ideals, like perfect form and realism. While the Baroque period still resembled and imitated many ideas of the renaissance it is easy to see that the subject matter and portrayal was taken to a new level during this movement. I will be comparing two sculptors depicting the biblical hero David to breakdown the differences and similarities in these two time periods of art.

I will begin with Michaelangelo’s David. Still viewed as a masterpiece in Renaissance art, the sculptor is perfect in scale and form. Michaelangelo received much deserved attention for this piece, for one reason. this was one of the first times David was depicted without Goliath. It shows David before the impossible battle and opens an entire new perspective on the story. It is a sculptor meant to show the seconds before the battle with Goliath and in every detail that anticipation comes to life. This sculptor holds dear the original ideals of the renaissance, in pure subject matter it is able to solute the humanistic style. The expression on David’s face is very tense and concentrated. The contrapposto position he was made to stand is very relaxed, while his tense neck and muscles hint at the battle to come. In every detail Michaelangelo tried to show David seconds before he fights a much larger and stronger opponent for his life. This is what was great about renaissance art, it brought you to the moment before the action took place, the moment of contemplation. The baroque period shoved the actual dramatized climax of the moment in the viewers face.

This can be seen in the many differences between Michaelangelo’s David and Bernini’s Sculptor of David. It is obvious the two sculptors are very different after the first glance. It all comes down to what each artist was trying to portray, and those are two very different things in this case. Bernini, working in the baroque movement, was focused on depicting the climax of the story rather then anything else. This means intense poses where action and ending are both implied. It was not good enough to show David before his battle nor was it enough to show him at some random point in the battle. This sculptor of David implies nothing less then the actual moment of David’s final blow to Goliath. What I find interesting is that like Michaelangelo’s David there is no representation of Goliath, something that is not usually left out in the depictions of this biblical legend, revealing the humanist ideals that are still evident in both of these sculptors and times. After that, other then the quality and craftsmanship the similarities between these two sculptors are few and far between. I enjoy Bernini’s sculptor because it seems to try and be the opposite of Michaelangelo’s. It shows an entire knew perspective of not just the hero standing awaiting the fight of his life, or even just the fight taking place but the pose of the contorted human figure of David winding up to throw his final blow to Goliath (who is not mortal enough to be shown.) While Michaelangelo;’s David is only standing in a slightly contrapposto stance, Bernini figure is depicted in such a manipulated way it holds so much more gravity and space, reminding the viewers it is three dimensional and inviting them to rally all around David.

I really enjoyed both of these Sculptors and find it to be one of the best blunt comparisons I have come across. Both Sculptors have similarities in quality and form and I cannot help but feel as if they belong next to each other, or at least are able to be read together as if a story line. While the differences in content between these two sculptors may only be a few seconds apart in the story of David the difference in style of these two time periods is what sets these two pieces apart and at the same time is what allows them to be read together.

Protestant Reformation

     The protestant reformation was a tense time in Europe and split the people and artists of the time. It was a time when the focus may have shifted from God or the divine to man or morality. It was not a loss, or less focus on religion, for most artists and art observers it was shift from one holy and perfect subject of the church and Christ to another discovered, humans and the everyday. Still assured with perfection and divine, the everyday scenarios were held in high esteem and began to show power in the subtle acts of Christ rather than Christ himself. This was a very dramatic change from what has been seen in Europe before this time and while many tried to hold on to the perfect and humanist approach, many others shifted gears and opened an entire new era in art.

      So where does the subject matter go when religion is not an obligated one any longer? Well, this question freed artists during the time, to paint what ever they saw as a strong composition. Many artists turned to landscapes or other media like engravings or sculpture. It is interesting how one of the main changes the reformation had in Europe was the down spiral of religiose paintings but that may not have been the way many artists saw it. While the paintings may have been taking on more subtle forms and subject matter it does not say the painters or viewers of the art saw anything less then God and the divine in the art. While a landscape may not shout with holy matter it could present it in a different way, something that takes a little more thought to discovery then the former blunt and in your face religious subject matter.

     Peasant wedding
c. 1568 (150 Kb); Oil on wood, 114 x 164 cm (45 x 64 1/2 in); Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna
        Peter Bruegel is one of these Artists who’s work was focused more on the everyday living and environment rather then religion in a literal and confronting sense. While a lot of his work did consciously depict religious characters and symbols, they were always surrounded by a vast landscape or other everyday scenario's that camoflaged the religious forms in and blended the subjects together. Bruegel paved the way for many other landscape artists and painters that also produced work that were void of the humanistic, religious and classical components and yet still brought a new and deeply connecting subject matter to the people. No longer was it one religious figure confronting the viewer after the other. Instead, it was the discovery in every new painting, print and sculpture of how these everyday and presumably subtle scenarios in art can be connected between our own morality and Gods divine creation of it all.

Vibrant Subtlety

I decided to compare and analyze Bronzino’s Allegory with Venus and Cupid along with Parmigianino’s Madonna with the Long Neck. Both of these paintings are innovative and amazing for there time. Bronzinos painting is very bizarre in the way it holds true to the mannerist style while Madonna with the Long Neck subtly shows off its exaggeration in form and content without being uncomfortable for the viewer.

         What I first enjoyed and studied during my first look at the painting Allegory with Venus and Cupid was the colors. Almost every figure had a very dull, unrealistic skin tone that made them look almost as ghosts, yet everything else in the scene seemed to be very colorful and vibrant. It was all down hill after that, every object and figure my eye stopped at was a very drastic change from what I have seen in the Early and high renaissance. Unity between the subjects was relevant but there was no unity that brought the scene completely together. It seemed almost as if there were multiple compositions put together almost as a collage, even the expressions and mood shifts from figure to figure. But in terms of form, scale and proportion, this work seems very realistic; this is one key difference between it and Parmigianino’s piece Madonna with the long Neck.

            Parmigianino did not blast the canvas with vibrant color, nor did he ignore the connection between the characters within his work. This painting seems very close to a classical renaissance piece but it cannot be said to be realistic witch traps it in the Mannerist style. Oddly the first thing I recalled from this painting was the man in the background. The use of putting a figure that far back opens the entire painting up and hinted my eye of the manipulation to come, as did the title. Mary and the angels are painted in a very realistic skin tone while the baby has a very light tint to his skin like Bronsino’s painting. The direct lighting seems to be giving the giant baby the ghostly shade and does Mannerist’s to reveal importance as if theaters spot light use a common effect. While this work is not quite bizarre and confrontational it still holds an essence of eerie, especially with the small but noticeable exaggerations of Mary and the babies form. The long neck, large legs and giant baby hold the viewer to ask why. But at the same time the painting had unity. Other then the background character trapped in the depth of the canvas, every angel was locked on Mary and Mary to the baby in her lap. 

               Both of these paintings hold there own essence of the mannerist style. One does it with subtle alterations in form and lighting, while Bronzino’s bluntly scatters the canvas with intense color and isolated subjects. These two pieces are very innovative and important both for the time they were created and even now. I find it to be very important that these two artists along with countless others stepped back from the classical appeal of the realistic and perfect and found power in symbolism and extravagance.