medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
From: John Dillon <[log in to unmask]>
On Monday, January 3, 2005, at 11:22 am, chris crockett wrote (quoting
and responding to Tom Ault):
>>Incidentally, the Renaissance began in a place where "gothic"
architecturewas very little in evidence.
>> ?
>> news to me.
> To me, too.
you left out
http://www.basilicadelsanto.org/gfx/visita/basi01.jpg
complete with graffiti.
many of the examples of Italian "Gothic" you so kindly offer demonstrate --to
all who might have eyes to see-- that the "style" frequently (usually?) took
quite radically different forms there than it did in its own _patrie_, most
often, it would seem, unable to fully overcome the entrenched traditions of
Italy's "romanesque" and/or Byzantine past.
eg., there is really nothing whatever "Gothic" about the exterior of this
building
http://www.basilicadelsanto.org/gfx/visita/basi01.jpg
save for some of the more or less "ornamental" details which your other views
of it showed.
it appears to be thoroughly "Romano-Byzantine", with a touch of Muslim (those
minarets!!) thrown in for good measure, heywhynot.
yet, the interior
http://www.basilicadelsanto.org/gfx/visita/int11.jpg
http://www.basilicadelsanto.org/gfx/visita/panor.jpg
http://www.basilicadelsanto.org/gfx/visita/ben.jpg
is acceptably "Gothic", save for that curious reluctance amongst the
Eyetalians to exploit the structural possibilities of the style to open up
their walls to the light
http://www.basilicadelsanto.org/gfx/visita/pre.jpg
for whatever reasons we've mentioned before --or others which might be closer
to the Truth.
while the distinction between the Constructs "Romanesque" and "Gothic" is
extremely dodgy, especially in France in the early and middle decades of the
12th c., no such "blurring" exists on the interface between the "Gothic" and
"Renaissance" styles, at least in Architecture.
the deliberate rejection of the "Gothic" taste in "decoration" (and even, in
most instances in Italy at least, in *structure*) in favor of the adoption of
a *radically* different form language (the "Classical") marks something rather
unusual in the history of art.
the closest thing to this phenomenon i can think of in western art was at the
very beginning of the "middle ages", when, in figure style, the "Hellenistic
Canon" was overthrown in favor of the adoption of the "sub-antique", which
transformation was given Official sanction during the reign of Constantine I.
however, in figure style the transition between the "Gothic" (or, especially
in Italy, the "Italo-Byzantine") and "Renaissance" styles was much more
nuanced and gradual than that which we see in architecture.
for those (starting with, at least, Vasari) who wish to see a very radical
break with the past in figure style, Giotto wants to be seen as the watershed
figure ; but a closer look at his work in the context of the Italo-Byzantine
milieu from which he came makes the idea of this clean-cut divergence more
than somewhat problematic --though it might not quite rise to the level of
"construct" which we see in the Romanesque/Gothic divide.
>So the following was a good thought:
>> http://davidhewson.typepad.com/photos/venice/doge.jpg
thanks, we try.
c
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|