Crean 1 from the Perfect Painting to the Late Quattrocento the Quattrocento in Italy Saw Many Various Artistic Styles. The

Crean 1 From the Perfect Painting to the Late Quattrocento The Quattrocento in Italy saw many various artistic styles. The fading of the Gothic style in the early Renaissance, to a more common approach first seen in the work of Masaccio, to the development of the perfect painting, and finally to the final artists of the Quattrocento, where naturalism dominated the stylistic choices of artists. Each new phase of style built upon the last as artists took old ideas and developed them in a constant effort of artistic innovation. The production of knowledge and questioning of reality drove the creation of new ideas and theories. By the later period of the Renaissance, art became the essence of Italy and its influence spread throughout Europe. The development of the perfect painting, also known as the second Renaissance style, came about in the early Quattrocento with artists such as Paolo Uccello, Domenico Veneziano, Andrea del Castagno and Leonbattista Alberti. The period of the perfect painter began as a result of the rapidly increasing writing and publication of artistic treatises. One of the first pieces of writing was by Alberti in 1435 titled Della Pittura and provided a general audience with surveys and advice regarding painting. The book expressed his opinions about the importance of geometry. Alberti’s writings also looked to “express the doctrine that ‘virtus’ was the most important quality to be sought in human life; [...] a combination of ideal human traits: intelligence, reason, knowledge, control, balance, perception, harmony, and dignity.” (H&W 239) As art historians we should also look at mid 16th century artist Giorgio Vasari and his latter literary work, The Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects (Lives for short) as a major artistic treatise. Vasari expressed what perfection in the arts meant to him, as it “consisted of the ability to reproduce forms in a naturalistic manner while adding an ineluctable aspect of grace to figural movement and to emulate, if not surpass, the artistic accomplishments Crean 2 of ancient Greece and Rome.” (Paoletti 24) Although it is not an example of a treatise that influenced perfect painting artists, as his work was written well after the period of the perfect painting, it is one of the most referenced historical accounts of everything happening in art during and before his life. It was with Della Pittura and many other writings on the doctrines of art that influenced this second Renaissance style. The treatises became the canons of the art world and artists followed them. The challenge of innovation that came with these academic texts made being an artist an even more competitive endeavor. They were forced to innovate to get commissions, as “the major commissions were awarded to the innovators, and artists who adhered to the Gothic Style were forced to seek commissions in small towns.” (299 H&W) However the desire for everlasting glory through artistic innovation became the ultimate driver of this competition, as artists were challenged to create something totally original: “Our fame ought to be much greater, then, if we discover unheard-of and never-before-seen arts and sciences without teachers or without any model whatsoever.” (Della Pittura prologue) Paolo Uccello (c. 1397-1475), one of the youngest to aspire for the perfect painting, was notoriously obsessed with perspective. He does not have many works throughout his long life, perhaps a testament to the “unconventionality” of his works. It was, and still is, often that scholars complained that he “spent too much time studying perspective.” (H&W 265) Giorgio Vasari later wrote in his Lives that Uccello once conducted a perspective study that represented “a polyhedron with seventy-two sides projected in space [...] executed in perfect recession.” (H&W 265) In Uccello’s Deluge (see fig.1), two scenes of Noah’s ark are depicted side by side from one another without a defining separation. Both scenes create a strong perspective of recession Crean 3 into space in the middle of the painting. Uccello includes two examples of orthogonals in his piece that really highlight his use of perspective recession. The ladder floating in the water in the scene on the left clearly recedes into space. The club-bearer beating on the ark and the women sitting in a relaxed posture front and center of the scene, both wearing “one of the favorite subjects of Uccello’s perspective investigations, the mazzocchio,” being the second example. (H&W 267) The scene becomes balanced in a way through the incorporation of two different scenes within one composition. As the scene on the left is dramatic and destructive, the scene on the right shows the calm aftermath of the storm, providing harmony within the work. Although Uccello is most known for his obsession of perspective, he also shows his attention to space and gracefulness within his figures. The gracefulness of Noah sticking out his hand to retrieve his dove, I believe, would be an element that Vasari would approve of. Another embodiment of Uccello’s study of perspective, Battle of San Romano (see fig. 2) depicts a scene that is less intense than Deluge and seems rather unnatural and unrealistic. Uccello uses geometric figures to form the bodies of humans and animals, rendering their anatomy in an odd geometric fashion. They also seem frozen and posed. The fallen lances create unnatural orthogonals that contribute to the recession in space but take away from a potentially realistic scene. Uccello’s struggle to depict a natural and anatomically realistic scene may have been due to his interest in perspective: “The geometrically simplified humans and animals and the carefully arranged angles of the fallen lances indicate the painters reputed obsessive interest in the new science of perspective.” (246 Paoletti) It is almost as if perspective has taken over the scientific laws of the natural world. Although we have seen perspective in previous works, such as Masaccio’s Trinity, no one before Uccello has made it an element of such obsession. Crean 4 It can be argued that Domenico Veneziano (c. 1410-61) was a better artist than Uccello due to his resumé. It is believed that he traveled away from Venice throughout his career, including to Rome to assist Gentile da Fabriano and Pisanello, and later settling down in Florence in 1439. (H&W 269) It is clear in his works that he also studied Masaccio and Fra Angelico, as his paintings consist of many-figured compositions and show a keen talent of using light to enhance his work. Contrary to Uccello’s works, perspective within Veneziano’s Madonna and Child (see fig. 3) is executed in a way that contributes to the scene. His perspective establishes a relationship between foreground and background without allowing perspective to take over. He develops Uccello’s perspective into a more concrete execution. There also contains elements of color and light that are executed brilliantly. Evidence of study from past Florentine artists such as Donatello and Ghiberti exist within the faces of the male saints as well as the muscular anatomy of St. John. (H&W 272) However Veneziano goes further to perfect the execution of shading and color. The faint shadow beneath the standing figure's feet, the beautiful and colorful patterns beneath the feet of Madonna, and the ability to accurately differentiate the small areas of color within St. Zenobius’ drapery and the pearls on Lucy and the Virgin are all examples of the careful attention and control he administers. Veneziano attempts to advance the idea of shading and use of color into a more complete stage within this piece, and I believe that he succeeds. Andrea del Castagno (c.1417-47) was an angry and violent man and it was believed that he was the one who murdered his predecessor Veneziano, which had a consequence on his reputation until it was recently disproven. (H&W) His masterpiece Last Supper (see fig. 4) also utilizes perspective, however in a different way than both Uccello and Veneziano. The figures in the scene seem to be all be placed in the background, despite them being the main subjects. Crean 5 Perspective here makes it seem as though we are looking into an actual room full of people. However, with careful study “the striking impression of three-dimensional reality is, surprisingly, deliberately inaccurate.” (H&W 275) The orthogonals of the footrest are not congruent with the vanishing point and the ceiling tiles, although consistent with the vanishing point, do not change in depth. Despite these deliberate inaccuracies and Castagno's knowledge of a rational perspective system from artists such as Brunelleschi and Alberti, there was a reason behind his decision: “If Castagno had used a consistent one-point perspective, he would have restricted the observer to a single point in the refectory, yet he wanted his illusion to be valid to every [viewer] in the room.” (H&W 275) To make up for the lack of a visual reality achieved through perspective, Castagno utilized light perhaps in an attempt to outdo Veneziano, the man whom he envied for his ability to execute lighting and color so brilliantly. His choice to depict the subjects within this scene often with an obvious emotion, as well as his invention of the exotic and abstract painted marble behind Jesus strengthens Castagno’s narrative interpretation. With this and Castagno’s bold attempts at foreshortening, his accurate use of lighting, and his overall rendering of the figures, it is safe to say that he successfully innovates within this piece as “his art sometimes seems to foreshadow that of Caravaggio,” (275 H&W) who came more than a century after himself.

Load more