Patrick lateur michelangelo biography
Abstract | Keywords | Export | Availability | Bookmark
Choose an application
In dit interessante werkje maken we kennis met tien (minder) beroemde mensen die blijkbaar heel veel last hadden van depressies: Michelangelo, Martin Luther, Arthur Schopenhauer, ... Alle tijden komen aan bod en zowel mannen als vrouwen passeren de revue: hoe hebben ze hun depressie precies verwerkt, wat was het resultaat van die depressies, ... Zo is de zelfmoord van dichteres Charlotte Stieglitz een verhaal dat aan de ribben blijft plakken.
Ignatii de Loyola, --- Michelangelo Buonarroti, --- Grenville, Anne. --- Haller, Albrecht, von, --- Luther, Martin, --- Pankejeff, Sergius, --- Schopenhauer, Arthur, --- Stieglitz, Charlotte. --- Zimmermann, Johann Georg.
From a French Modernist painter I am moving to an Italian Romantic painter. Today I am featuring Tommaso Minardi and looking at his painting entitled Self Portrait, which he painted in 1807.
Tommaso Minardi was born in Faenza in 1787, an Italian city some fifty kilometres south-east of Bologna. As a teenager he studied art and design at a private school, as a pupil of Giuseppi Zauli. Minardi was granted an annual stipend by Count Virgilio Cavina of Faenza and in addition, he received financial assistance in the form of a stipend, from the Congregazione di S Gregorio of Faenza. Thanks to this five year stipend from his patron, Minardi, who was not yet sixteen years of age, moved to Rome to continue his artistic studies. The terms of this five year grant were such that the young man had to send one completed work of art back to Faenza each year. His paintings Socrates and Alcibiades and Supper at Emmaus were two of his works he sent back to his patron in Faenza. At the age of twenty-three he entered a painting into an annual competition run by the Bologna Academy of Fine Arts and he won and his reward was financial stability for the next three years.
Whilst in Rome he studied art but was also employed by the painter and engraver Giuseppe Longhi, who was an exponent of Neoclassicism and for his employer he did reproduction drawings of Michelangelo’s Last Judgement in the Sistine Chapel.
In his thirties Minardi began to teach art and in 1819 he was appointed director of the Academy of Fine Arts in Perugia. Three years later he became professor of drawing at the Accademia di San Luca in Rome, a position he held for over thirty-five years. Besides his own painting and teaching, Minardi began to take an interest in local politics and he spent much of his time working tirelessly for the protection and restoration of the capital city’s great heritage. Tommaso Minari died in Rome in 1871, aged eighty-three.
My Daily Art Display’s featured painting Made to Measure: Eugène Guillaume’s Michelangelo by Claire Black McCoy In 1876, the academic sculptor Eugène Guillaume published an article, “Michel-Ange, sculpteur,” in the Gazette des Beaux-Arts.[1] It was the first extensive study focused on Michelangelo’s sculpture published in France. Guillaume’s article responded to those who admired Michelangelo’s sculpture for its passion and force and found in those powerful contorted figures a reflection of the turbulent character of the Italian Renaissance. Guillaume took a very different view, presenting an interpretation of Michelangelo’s sculpture that emphasized the artist’s debt to the classical tradition and styled Michelangelo as a man who, like Guillaume, found refuge from turmoil in the enduring tradition of classical art. Like so many books, chapters, essays, paintings, and poems about Michelangelo created in nineteenth-century France, Guillaume’s essay has been eclipsed completely by more modern approaches to Michelangelo rooted in the examination of documentary evidence.[2] “Made to Measure: Eugène Guillaume’s Michelangelo” examines Guillaume’s article, “Michel-Ange, sculpteur,” as a reflection of the concerns and attitudes of its author, during the early years of the Third Republic, uncovering an interpretation of Michelangelo distinctly rooted in nineteenth-century France. The eighty-five page article was part of a special issue of 1It is surprising to find a critic as sensitive to the ideas in Pater’s work as David Carrier telling us that Pater had ‘little interest in or knowledge of contemporary visual art’ and again: ‘Pater isn’t interested in contemporary visual art’ (Carrier 1995: 112, 113). To many this claim would seem counter-intuitive. It is true that Pater never wrote any extensive piece on a contemporary artist, but his writing is punctuated with references, often covert or veiled, to the work of living artists he knew or admired. One document alone is testimony to this abiding passion. His 1893 review of George Moore’s Modern Painting is confident, knowledgeable, and authoritative. Throughout the short text he endorses or takes issue with Moore’s views on painters such as Ingres, Degas, and Millet. He puts forward his own views of the work of Corot, and congratulates Moore for being in the possession of what he calls the ‘secret’ of Sisley, Puvis de Chavannes and Monet. He praises Moore for recognising the ‘personal [and] the uncontrollable’ in the work of Whistler and Sargent. And he concludes by saying that Moore’s book would appeal both to ‘those who, being outsiders in the matter of art, are nevertheless sensitive and sincerely receptive towards it’ and equally ‘to those who in this matter really know . . .’, making it clear by further elaboration that he himself was one of those who ‘really know’ (Pater 1919: 149-50). His highly developed visual sensibility has never been called in question. Emilia Pattison told the first readers of Studies in the History of the Renaissance that Pater ‘can detect with singular subtlety the shades of tremulous variation which have been embodied in throbbing pulsations of colour . . .’ (Seiler 1980: 72). Furthermore he uses images, often reflected, or refracted away from their sources or as reminiscences buried deep in his memory to provide stepping-stones for his mental processes, and sometimes those images were drawn from
Claire Black McCoy is the William B. and Sue Marie Turner Faculty Chair in Art History at Columbus State University where she directs the program in Art History. She received her MA from the University of Texas at Austin and her PhD from Virginia Commonwealth University. She specializes in the study of modern sculpture and the impact nineteenth-century interpretations of Renaissance artists had on art criticism and practice. She is currently writing a new history of modern sculpture for use in undergraduate courses.
Email the author: mccoy_claire[at]columbusstate.eduNavigation