Strategy and Identity in the Careers of Sixteenth Century Venetian Painters
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
the Road to Recognition Strategy and identity in the careers of sixteenth century Venetian painters Clim Wijnands / 4222385 / Master Thesis / dr. Bram de Klerck / 28-08-2017 Table of Contents Introduction 3 1. Vantage points 7 1.1 Theoretical framework 7 1.2 Consuming and social stratification in Renaissance Venice 13 1.3 Patronage in Renaissance Venice 18 2. Lorenzo Lotto: the wanderer 25 2.1 A promising start 27 2.2 Problems and solutions in Venice 34 2.3 Running to stand still 40 3. Giovanni Antonio da Pordenone: the embodiment of the new 49 3.1 From provincial artist to recognised master 51 3.2 Establishing a foothold 60 3.3 The conquest of Venice 64 4. Gerolamo Savoldo: the original avant-garde 69 4.1 Fashioning a marketable identity 71 4.2 Breakthrough and oblivion 77 Conclusion 86 Bibliography 90 Figures 95 Appendices 110 2 Introduction Art history has always had the tendency to focus on the accomplished painters at the top of the artistic food chain. In reality, however, many talented painters struggled immensely to reach that top, while an even larger number of mediocre painters could only dream of fame and glory. This research is not primarily concerned with the elite artists, nor does it cover the many anonymous painter-craftsmen in the periphery of the art market. Instead, it is devoted to the middle group of ambitious and skilled artists trying to break out of the margins of the art world. Sixteenth-century Venice was a city with an abundance of churches, scuole and palaces, and was governed by a culturally sophisticated elite. This provided fertile ground for the visual arts, and indeed many talented artists flocked to the lagoon city to make their fortunes. In practice, however, the lion’s share of the high-profile commissions (such as altarpieces, church decorations, governmental commissions, and large scale private decorations) was divided between a relatively small group of extremely talented and ambitious painters such as Bellini, Giorgione, Sebastiano del Piombo, Veronese, Tintoretto, and, above all, Titian. The rivalry between these painters, as is documented by the excellent 2010 catalogue accompanying the exhibition Titian – Tintoretto – Veronese: Rivals in Renaissance Venice, was intense, and constantly pushed less business-savvy Venetian painters to the margins, while it also prevented outsiders from breaking through in the Venetian art market.1 These often very capable artists had to invent new or adapt old business strategies to break the hegemony of the elite circle of Venetian artists. Some painters were forced to work in provincial towns in Venice’s sphere of influence, such as Piacenza, Brescia, or Bergamo, and tried to use these markets as a spring board for a Venetian career. Others remained in or near Venice, but only produced paintings for customers of a relatively low social and financial status. One can logically assume that these painters were not satisfied with this situation, and did everything in their power to improve their status. For these ambitious painters it was of vital importance to build and maintain a good reputation. They used their paintings to construct a unique artistic and professional identity and to brand themselves as artists capable of filling certain niches in the art market. Thus, the paintings became their primary vehicle for social and financial mobility. This also influenced their clients, who were eager to (re)shape their identities and enhance their social status as well.2 In this research, I analyse the position of both these artists and the clients in the competitive art world and society of Renaissance Venice. To do so, I examine which strategies these painters used to enhance their careers, and how these strategies 1 Exh. Cat. Boston and Paris, 2010. 2 Belozerskaya, 2002, p. 225. 3 influenced their art. These strategies are analysed and compared thoroughly, while special attention is devoted to their influence on the painters’ clients. To conduct this analysis, I have used extensive case studies of three painters working in early cinquecento Venice and the Veneto: Lorenzo Lotto, Giovanni Antonio da Pordenone, and Giovan Gerolamo Savoldo. I have selected these three artists because they were active in the same years, they all faced difficulties in building their (Venetian) career, and employed comparable but distinctive strategies to try and overcome these difficulties. Furthermore, sufficient primary and secondary source material was available on these artists to conduct my analysis, while it was lacking for others. As it is impossible to take the entire careers into account, I selected two or three important transitional periods for all three artists. These periods were chosen for their relevance to my research theme, not for their artistic merit. Lotto’s years in Bergamo, which were very productive and saw the conception of various masterpieces, for example, are omitted, as are Pordenone’s highly praised fresco cycles in Piacenza. The selected periods feature important transitions in the artists’ careers or social standing, and are focused on Venice or the road to get there. I chose to focus my research on Venice and its territories because of the unique artistic climate briefly touched upon in my first paragraph and discussed further in the first chapter. The scope of this thesis does not allow me to make comparisons with other major artistic centres such as Florence or Rome, although this would be interesting for further research. Of the three artists, only Lotto was born in Venice. He left the city shortly after he completed his apprenticeship, however, and consequently had great difficulty in regaining a foothold on the Venetian market. Lotto’s search for new opportunities brought him to Treviso, Rome, Bergamo, and the Marches, but he never lost track of his goal: Venice.3 Pordenone, who was named after his hometown in the rural Friuli, was arguably the most cunning of our painters. Although he initially faced great difficulties as a provincial artist, he evolved into a recognised master frescante in Venice. Pordenone favoured aggressive tactics, and used his highly modern style to fashion an identity as the ‘embodiment of the new’.4 Savoldo came from a more privileged background than the other two painters, as he was a scion of a (minor) patrician family from Brescia.5 Despite these good credentials, however, he 3 Of the three artists, Lotto has received the most academic attention. He was ‘rediscovered’ by Bernard Berenson, who devoted an authorative monography on the artist in 1901. More recent publications are the catalogue of the landmark 1997 exhibition in Washington, Bergamo, and Paris, and the monographies written by Bonnet (1996) and Pirovano (2011). The 2011 exhibition in the Quirinale in Rome was especially important for Lotto-related research. Not only was it accompanied by Villa’s monographic catalogue, but it also spawned a number of research projects focussing on Lotto’s work in the Veneto (Poldi and Villa, 2011), and the Marches (Garibaldi and Villa, 2013). 4 The first serious academic publications on Pordenone appear in the 1980s. The 1984 retrospective in the artist’s hometown was vital in renewing interest in the artist. In 1988, Furlan published the first comprehensive monography on the artist. Cohen’s two-volume monography of 1996 is so thorough and indeed exhaustive that few publications on Pordenone have appeared ever since. 5 Savoldo is the least researched of the three artists. Gilbert wrote his dissertation on the artist (1955, revised in 1986), and was largely responsible for renewing academic interest in Savoldo. Another publication that 4 struggled immensely in gaining a foothold on the Venetian art market. Savoldo used his training in the ‘realistic’ Lombard tradition and his knowledge of the highly popular styles from the Netherlands and Germany to attract innovative Venetian patrons. Savoldo worked mostly in the private sphere and never had much success with public commission.6 My methodological framework, which will be discussed in more detail in the following chapter, features a number of concepts and theories on social stratification, economic activity, ideology, identity, the painter’s profession, patronage, and artistic innovation. In addition to my conceptual framework, I employ a number of art historical methods, including literature study, stylistic analysis, and the thorough study of contemporary sources, to conduct my research. Furthermore, much attention will be devoted to the social- economic context of cinquecento Venice and its empire. The first chapter is devoted to methodology and social-economic context. Additionally, the unique patronage situation in cinquecento Venice will be discussed in detail. This provides context for the other three chapters, which are each devoted to one case study: chapter two analyses Lotto’s career, chapter three focuses on Pordenone, and the final chapter is about Savoldo. In my conclusion, I compare and contrast the three case studies. The patronage and rivalries of Titian, Veronese, and Tintoretto have been studied extensively, most importantly in the previously mentioned catalogue accompanying the 2010 exhibition in Boston and Paris. No comprehensive study, however, has yet appeared on the large and diverse number of cinquecento artists that were by effect left out of the highest regions of the Venetian art market exists. Comparable yet distinctive studies of different era’s or art centres do exist. Goldwaithe’s Wealth and the demand for art in Renaissance Italy (1998), on which the next chapter will elaborate, thoroughly analyses the economic dimension of Renaissance art, but is primarily focused on demand, production, and consumption, and not on the works of art themselves. Sohm and Spear’s 2010 study of the economic lives of seventeenth-century Italian painters also serves as a point of departure for this research, as it devotes an excellent chapter on Venice, but their research does not cover the first half of the cinquecento.