Select ONE work of art that has not appeared in the course lectures or tutorials, and discuss it from THREE different methodological perspectives.
Different methodological perspectives enable further examination of David with the head of Goliath (1573-1610), painting made by Italian painter Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1571-1610). David with the head of Goliath can be evaluated using biographically-based art history on the life and work of Caravaggio, providing a detailed exposition of the life of the artist, closely linked by his contemporaries to his style and aesthetics. Social constructs are significant in the analysis of the piece, employing Marxist theory in David with the head of Goliath, point out important aspects of the17th …show more content…
Written records from biographers on the life of an artist, provides deeper meaning to the artwork analysed. Formally written accounts of Caravaggio’s life and work were made by Giovan Pietro Bellori (1613 –1696) and Giovanni Baglione (1566 – 1643). According to Stone, Caravaggio’s biographers had biased opinions about Caravaggio and his work, Baglione a rival painter of Caravaggio in occasion sued the artist for libel and Bellori, contended with the artist’s aesthetics. Merisi’s biographers linked his tumultuous life and behaviour with his artistic reproductions. Bellori wrote ‘Le Vite de Pittori’, a 17th century version of Vasari’s Lives of the Artist. In his text Bellori describes Caravaggio’s art as “terribile” and referred to his religious reproductions with “lack of decorum by filling them with every sort of vulgarity”. David with the head Goliath was a piece closely examined by Caravaggio’s biographers. Biographer Filippo Baldinucci (1624-1697) cited the renaissance proverb of “every painter paints himself” pointing at Caravaggio for adopting this notion in his own style of tenebrism influenced by his violent and dark personality. David with the head Goliath is romantically described as Caravaggio’s last painting made in exile as a papal petition for pardon for the murder of Ranuccio Tomassoni. The piece is expressed by Varriano as “Caravaggio’s most autobiographical works”, …show more content…
Marxist theory argues the impact of high social entities on the masses, David with the head of Goliath exemplifies this aspect as the main subject is a story of the Old Testament, religious reproductions were highly affiliated with the Catholic Church in Europe as major patrons of the arts. According to Althusser, the church is an ideological state apparatus which uses materiality to impart beliefs on the lower classes. David with the head of Goliath was not made exclusively for the church; however Caravaggio made it as means to earn pardon from Scipione Borghese for his return to Rome due to his criminal sentence. Caravaggio seeks refuge under an entity which had the power not only to redeem his crimes and save his life. Aspects regarding the reality of Roman society during Caravaggio’s time can be observed in his piece as being part of a gruesome scene which displayed the reality of poverty and raw violence at the time. Goliath represents a Caravaggio tired of the society in which he lives, there is a strong contrast between light and dark, good versus evil represents the environment of the taverns in which he usually engaged. Caravaggio was highly criticised for his exchange of idealised representation of classical figures for the introduction of peasants as seen in the he portrayal of young David dressed peasant clothes showing humility, an aspect criticised by Bellori referring to
Different methodological perspectives enable further examination of David with the head of Goliath (1573-1610), painting made by Italian painter Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1571-1610). David with the head of Goliath can be evaluated using biographically-based art history on the life and work of Caravaggio, providing a detailed exposition of the life of the artist, closely linked by his contemporaries to his style and aesthetics. Social constructs are significant in the analysis of the piece, employing Marxist theory in David with the head of Goliath, point out important aspects of the17th …show more content…
Written records from biographers on the life of an artist, provides deeper meaning to the artwork analysed. Formally written accounts of Caravaggio’s life and work were made by Giovan Pietro Bellori (1613 –1696) and Giovanni Baglione (1566 – 1643). According to Stone, Caravaggio’s biographers had biased opinions about Caravaggio and his work, Baglione a rival painter of Caravaggio in occasion sued the artist for libel and Bellori, contended with the artist’s aesthetics. Merisi’s biographers linked his tumultuous life and behaviour with his artistic reproductions. Bellori wrote ‘Le Vite de Pittori’, a 17th century version of Vasari’s Lives of the Artist. In his text Bellori describes Caravaggio’s art as “terribile” and referred to his religious reproductions with “lack of decorum by filling them with every sort of vulgarity”. David with the head Goliath was a piece closely examined by Caravaggio’s biographers. Biographer Filippo Baldinucci (1624-1697) cited the renaissance proverb of “every painter paints himself” pointing at Caravaggio for adopting this notion in his own style of tenebrism influenced by his violent and dark personality. David with the head Goliath is romantically described as Caravaggio’s last painting made in exile as a papal petition for pardon for the murder of Ranuccio Tomassoni. The piece is expressed by Varriano as “Caravaggio’s most autobiographical works”, …show more content…
Marxist theory argues the impact of high social entities on the masses, David with the head of Goliath exemplifies this aspect as the main subject is a story of the Old Testament, religious reproductions were highly affiliated with the Catholic Church in Europe as major patrons of the arts. According to Althusser, the church is an ideological state apparatus which uses materiality to impart beliefs on the lower classes. David with the head of Goliath was not made exclusively for the church; however Caravaggio made it as means to earn pardon from Scipione Borghese for his return to Rome due to his criminal sentence. Caravaggio seeks refuge under an entity which had the power not only to redeem his crimes and save his life. Aspects regarding the reality of Roman society during Caravaggio’s time can be observed in his piece as being part of a gruesome scene which displayed the reality of poverty and raw violence at the time. Goliath represents a Caravaggio tired of the society in which he lives, there is a strong contrast between light and dark, good versus evil represents the environment of the taverns in which he usually engaged. Caravaggio was highly criticised for his exchange of idealised representation of classical figures for the introduction of peasants as seen in the he portrayal of young David dressed peasant clothes showing humility, an aspect criticised by Bellori referring to