Some of you in my ART HIST 3S03 course may be wondering why I selected to use a text that was originally published by Millard Meiss in 1951. To answer this question it is first necessary to draw attention to the importance this book has held for scholars interested in late medieval and early Italian Renaissance art.
The 13th and 14th centuries are associated with a transitional period in European history. During this time significant social and cultural changes occured. These changes (registered keenly in the fields of political and religious thinking, education, science and the arts) have conventionally been associated with a shift away from an old medieval order to a cultural 'Renaissance' or 'rebirth of classicism'. In the visual field this 'Renaissance' was ultimately expressed in formal terms (ie., in the rendering of figures, the treatment of compositional space, etc.) and in the theoretical treatment, reception and uses of art and architecture. Survey texts on art history will frequently point to the work of Italian 14th-century artists such as Giotto or Duccio to illustrate this point. In their work we witness the emergence of a new art that will develop in the 15th century and culminate in the work of 16th-century artists such as Michelangelo and Raphael.
The historiographic model presented here might, at first, seem quite compelling. It is not hard to imagine that art could experience a period of change during which new ideas are born and mature rather like a child growing into adulthood. Yet upon closer consideration the model becomes less convincing. How should we account for works of art that indicate a regression in terms of style or ideas? And where should we place works that eschew new ideas in favour of tradition? Questions of this order simply complicate matters and lead us to reconsider the usefulness of an historiographic model that fails to account for such anomalies.
Fortunately (and conveniently) for Meiss the historiographic model of progressive development was not an issue though his interests in 13th- and 14th-century Italian art did lead him to consider the problem of regressive style. In an introductory passage to his book Meiss draws attention to a discussion that reputedly took place between a group of late 14th-century Florentine painters at the church of San Miniato al Monte. The discussion finds the painters praising the earlier work of Giotto and lamenting the decline of art in their time. For Meiss this passage confirmed that artists of the period were aware that painting had deviated from the innovative models of the early Trecento and suffered as a result.
Whether art really did experience a decline is questionable and this is a matter that will be explored in our 3S03 course. Meiss nonetheless took the ideas expressed at San Miniato at face value and sought an explanation for the changes that so disturbed the Florentine painters. What could have caused art to shift away from the progressive ideas offered by Giotto in such a short period of time? The answer, for Meiss, lay in the dramatic cultural and social shock brought on by the plague (Black Death).
The argument presented by Meiss has since been challenged and we will be examining some of its flaws. At the same time we will need to look at its strengths and consider some of the reasons that might account for its longevity. Once we have come to terms with this text and the various dimensions of its argument we can then better understand the current state of scholarship pertaining to this important moment in art history.
The 13th and 14th centuries are associated with a transitional period in European history. During this time significant social and cultural changes occured. These changes (registered keenly in the fields of political and religious thinking, education, science and the arts) have conventionally been associated with a shift away from an old medieval order to a cultural 'Renaissance' or 'rebirth of classicism'. In the visual field this 'Renaissance' was ultimately expressed in formal terms (ie., in the rendering of figures, the treatment of compositional space, etc.) and in the theoretical treatment, reception and uses of art and architecture. Survey texts on art history will frequently point to the work of Italian 14th-century artists such as Giotto or Duccio to illustrate this point. In their work we witness the emergence of a new art that will develop in the 15th century and culminate in the work of 16th-century artists such as Michelangelo and Raphael.
The historiographic model presented here might, at first, seem quite compelling. It is not hard to imagine that art could experience a period of change during which new ideas are born and mature rather like a child growing into adulthood. Yet upon closer consideration the model becomes less convincing. How should we account for works of art that indicate a regression in terms of style or ideas? And where should we place works that eschew new ideas in favour of tradition? Questions of this order simply complicate matters and lead us to reconsider the usefulness of an historiographic model that fails to account for such anomalies.
Fortunately (and conveniently) for Meiss the historiographic model of progressive development was not an issue though his interests in 13th- and 14th-century Italian art did lead him to consider the problem of regressive style. In an introductory passage to his book Meiss draws attention to a discussion that reputedly took place between a group of late 14th-century Florentine painters at the church of San Miniato al Monte. The discussion finds the painters praising the earlier work of Giotto and lamenting the decline of art in their time. For Meiss this passage confirmed that artists of the period were aware that painting had deviated from the innovative models of the early Trecento and suffered as a result.
Whether art really did experience a decline is questionable and this is a matter that will be explored in our 3S03 course. Meiss nonetheless took the ideas expressed at San Miniato at face value and sought an explanation for the changes that so disturbed the Florentine painters. What could have caused art to shift away from the progressive ideas offered by Giotto in such a short period of time? The answer, for Meiss, lay in the dramatic cultural and social shock brought on by the plague (Black Death).
The argument presented by Meiss has since been challenged and we will be examining some of its flaws. At the same time we will need to look at its strengths and consider some of the reasons that might account for its longevity. Once we have come to terms with this text and the various dimensions of its argument we can then better understand the current state of scholarship pertaining to this important moment in art history.
No comments:
Post a Comment