"Virtue and Beauty"--Italian Renaissance Portraits
Afropea
"Virtue and Beauty". The book comes from an exhibit that was at the National
Gallery in DC. I truly regret missing the show. It looks like it was a good
one!
First off, I thought people might be interested in knowing a Renaissance
standard of beauty. Here's the ideal as stated by Boccaccio--
"What was prized was an artful coiffure, youth, a high forehead, pale skin,
rosy cheeks, red lips (not cosmetically aided) combined in perfect proportions,
diminutive where desirable (pencil-thin, semicircular eyebrows, dainty lips,
miniature teeth, small feet) and full where physical bounty belongs (in the
flesh ringing the throat, the firm breast)."
Part of the purpose for many of these pictures was to document the marriage
dowry as well as the groom's gifts of fabulous jewels and costume. Here's a
description of one the National Gallery's own paintings by Ambrogio de'Predis--
"The nuptial carnation tucked into the belt of Bianca Maria Sforza--who, at
twenty-one in 1493, would barely have been considered nubile--confirms that the
work celebrates the alliance with which, after forty years of illegitimacy, her
uncle the duke purchased Sforza investiture of Milan by marrying her to his
overlord, Emperor Maximilian. Her enormous dowry amounted to more than one
hundred thousand ducats, of which the *donora* of jewels and clothes was valued
at seventy-thousand ducats. The rubies, turquoises, emeralds, diamonds, and
five outside pearls in the heraldic device of brush (*scoptta*)--with which
Lodvico, much like our modern politicians, promised to sweep the peninsula
clean of corruption--on her headdress alone were valued at six hundred ducats.
Bianca Maria's jeweled belt (a symbol of chastity), gem-encursted hair netting,
necklace and pendants, and ropes of black and white pearls crisscrossing the
long queue of hair should be read in proclaiming the fabulous wealth of Sforza
Milan. As a metaphor for Milanese purchasing might, this state portrait
amounts to the ultimate "dowry" image."
At times, sumputary laws restricted the lavish gems and garments that could be
worn. In such a cases a bride might be shown with her jewels placed on shelves
or within niches. Another alternative to such ostentatious displays was the
use expensive, yet subtle quality materials. But the artist needed to show
more than wealth alone. One would also find the sitter associated with
symbolic colors, plants, animals and various other paraphernalia used to
represent chastity, virtue, fertility and the other values sought in a wife.
Not all portraits dealt with marriage, as can be seen in this next portrait by
Leonardo Da Vinci--
"Leonardo's second extant female likeness, painted c. 1490 at this same court,
depicted an individual of less exalted rank that the duke of Milan's niece: his
mistress. Cecilia Gallerani's lack of political standing must have been a
crucial factor in allowing the artist to experiment with the role of the body
in portraiture. Certainly her lesser status released him from the necessity of
following the rigid conventions of state portraiture.
Hitherto, female hands, when shown, had inconspicuously clasped the fabric of
skirt...or handkerchief..., or been placed decorously on heart or womb...Never
before Leonardo's portrait had the female hand been given such importance.
Where Flemish artists often enlarged the head, Leonardo expanded the lady's
hand. Suspended on display, it was given the ostensible function of caressing
an allegorical animal that is also represented as larger than life. The
portrait of the living ermine, whose fur was much sought after, served a
threefold purpose: its designation in Greek, *galee*, was a pun on the sitter's
family name; it was a well-known symbol of purity because it was believed too
fastidious to soil itself; and it was a heraldic emblem of the duke of Milan.
Leonardo moved beyond the static three-quarter view of Ginevera de'Benici that
conveyed the social ideal of the female body as upright and contained by
experimenting with the daring concept of that same body as flexible and mobile.
Cecilia is fashioned as spiraling gracefully in contrapposto from left to
right, towards the light, to greet a visitor who approaches from the right
outside the confines of the painting. We are probably meant to read the
visitor as her Sforza lover, whose body she already symbolically cradles in her
arms. This flexed pose, unprecedented in European painting, locates her head
on a different axis from that of her body and adds a narrative component to the
hitherto iconic portrait.
No animal--here marker for both sitter and patron--had previously shared the
portrait limelight, and few can have since been put to better artistic use.
While concealing the lady's heart, and its sentiments for her ducal lover, the
ermine, its own paw lifted in greeting, is in turn protected by his lover,
whose sensitive, attenuated fingers endow the sense of touch with new
significance. The nervous charm, as well as the physical torsion, of beauty
and beast can be seen as having been assimilated the one to the other."
IMHO, a stunning painting! It's from the Princes Czartoryski Foundation in
Crakcow, but I'm sure you can find it on any site with the works of Leonardo.
A significant difference from the first picture to the second was in the move
from side profile to fuller face. There are many explanations for the
dominance of the profile in early Italian art, from donor portrait origins to
an imitation of imperial heads on antique coins (a case often made for
portraits intended to relay political power). Such a pose also eliminates gaze
on the part of the sitter. And it limits a sense of personality. Of course,
these portraits were not meant to engage the spectator nor to reveal
personality. They were meant to relay a "type".
OTH, the Northern tradition portraits used in a three quarters pose and it's
believed that this influenced the Italians. Leonardo was one of the early
Italian artists to shift his figure's position and gaze. This also allowed him
to reveal a sense of his model's character as well as her relationship to the
world outside the painting.
Of course, there's a lot more I could say about the book. And there are those
stunning reproductions. If you're interested in the subject matter at all,
it's definitely worth a look.
Eve
Simon Pugh
<afr...@aol.com> writes
I also think it is a stunning portrait and one thing that always struck
me is that the lady looks a little like the ermine. :)
It is all strangely sensual although the ermine symbolises purity etc.
>
>A significant difference from the first picture to the second was in the move
>from side profile to fuller face. There are many explanations for the
>dominance of the profile in early Italian art, from donor portrait origins to
>an imitation of imperial heads on antique coins (a case often made for
>portraits intended to relay political power). Such a pose also eliminates gaze
>on the part of the sitter. And it limits a sense of personality. Of course,
>these portraits were not meant to engage the spectator nor to reveal
>personality. They were meant to relay a "type".
>
>OTH, the Northern tradition portraits used in a three quarters pose and it's
>believed that this influenced the Italians. Leonardo was one of the early
>Italian artists to shift his figure's position and gaze. This also allowed him
>to reveal a sense of his model's character as well as her relationship to the
>world outside the painting.
>
>Of course, there's a lot more I could say about the book. And there are those
>stunning reproductions. If you're interested in the subject matter at all,
>it's definitely worth a look.
>
>Eve
Thanks Eve I will look out for the book.
--
Simon Pugh
John G Harrison
"Simon Pugh" <si...@mrzsp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e$XGOqARM...@mrzsp.demon.co.uk...
> me is that the lady looks a little like the ermine. :)
> It is all strangely sensual although the ermine symbolises purity etc.
But surely, in this world of emblem and sign, the supposed 'purity' is the
ultimate turn-on - for some, anyway?
Regards
John
Simon Pugh
<jo...@aremovebercromby14.freeserve.co.uk> writes
And...
The story goes that if an ermine, noted for its spotless white fur, fell
into a puddle, it went rigid and died.
This is said to be the origin of the ermine signifying "Death before
Dishonour".
--
Simon Pugh
Afropea
>But surely, in this world of emblem and sign, the supposed 'purity' is the
>ultimate turn-on - for some, anyway?
I don't know much about her, but perhaps it meant purity of the soul? Perhaps
she lacks guile.
I'll look her up if I get a chance and see if I can find more out.
Eve
John G Harrison
"Afropea" <afr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020130154910...@mb-ml.aol.com...
My point is the basic one that in a society where men paid for a woman's
virginity - whether via a bride price or in the bordello - 'purity' is a
very ambiguous beast!
John
Afropea
>Date: Wed, Jan 30, 2002 3:30 PM
>Message-id: <a39om4$3c4$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>
I see your point, that it then can become a generic value. However, I don't
think virginity was necessarily a virtue in one's mistress. Although the
alleged "deflowering" of a virgin prostitute was considered "some fun" in the
Renaissance, many courtesans were often in fashion partly because of their
popularity.
But in the case of a mistress, her fidelity may be considered important, but as
to whether or not her literal purity at time of purchase was an issue, I'm not
so sure. I'd have to know more about this particular woman. It could be a
literal reference, it could be a generic one, it could refer to other aspects
of her character or it could be one symbol that really wasn't intended among
the many.
Actually, in the same book there's a wonderful description of a Renaissance
beauty which was painted by Guilio Romano for the admiration of King François
of France. This woman was married and already the mother of two, yet she was
still considered a major pinup. The eroticism was totally subtle. I didn't
mention it before because it went past the 1500 mark, but if you're interested
I'll type out the info.
Eve
D. Spencer Hines
"Eve" is trotting out her sexuality and advertising.
Hilarious.
I'm beginning to think that "Eve" is a _he_ in drag.
Deus Vult.
"The TV business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic
hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs."
Hunter Thompson
"When it comes to arrogance, power, and lack of accountability,
journalists are probably the only people on the planet who make lawyers
look good."
Steven Brill
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
----------
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
"Afropea" <afr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020131120432...@mb-fv.aol.com...
Gilmore, Phyllis
afr...@aol.com (Afropea) wrote:
> >"John G Harrison" jo...@aremovebercromby14.freeserve.co.uk
> >Date: Wed, Jan 30, 2002 3:30 PM
> >Message-id: <a39om4$3c4$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>
I'll look her up if I get a chance and see if I can find more out.
> >
> >My point is the basic one that in a society where men paid for a woman's
> >virginity - whether via a bride price or in the bordello - 'purity' is a
> >very ambiguous beast!
>
> I see your point, that it then can become a generic value. However, I don't
> think virginity was necessarily a virtue in one's mistress. Although the
> alleged "deflowering" of a virgin prostitute was considered "some fun" in the
> Renaissance, many courtesans were often in fashion partly because of their
> popularity.
>
> But in the case of a mistress, her fidelity may be considered important, but
> as
> to whether or not her literal purity at time of purchase was an issue, I'm
> not
> so sure.
I would think fidelity would be a big issue with a mistress--after all,
one is paying for exclusivity, in part. But might not "purity" also
indicate virtues other than those related to sexuality?
Just asking--
Phyllis
Renia
> >"John G Harrison" jo...@aremovebercromby14.freeserve.co.uk
> >Date: Wed, Jan 30, 2002 3:30 PM
> >Message-id: <a39om4$3c4$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>
> >
> >
> >"Afropea" <afr...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:20020130154910...@mb-ml.aol.com...
> >> John G. Harrison says
> >>
> >> >But surely, in this world of emblem and sign, the supposed 'purity' is
> >the ultimate turn-on - for some, anyway?
> >>
> >> I don't know much about her, but perhaps it meant purity of the soul?
> >Perhaps
> >> she lacks guile.
> >>
> >> I'll look her up if I get a chance and see if I can find more out.
> >
> >My point is the basic one that in a society where men paid for a woman's
> >virginity - whether via a bride price or in the bordello - 'purity' is a
> >very ambiguous beast!
>
> I see your point, that it then can become a generic value. However, I don't
> think virginity was necessarily a virtue in one's mistress. Although the
> alleged "deflowering" of a virgin prostitute was considered "some fun" in the
> Renaissance, many courtesans were often in fashion partly because of their
> popularity.
That's a bit like saying that a book is often blue partly because it's blue. It's
the same thing.
Renia
Afropea
>>Eve says
> in the
>> Renaissance, many courtesans were often in fashion partly because of their
>> popularity.
>
>That's a bit like saying that a book is often blue partly because it's blue.
>It's
>the same thing.
LOL, when I first wrote that I looked at it twice and thought the same thing,
but it really isn't. As least not in the sense that I meant it. They were
considered "fashionable" in the sense of fun to have at parties, to gossip
about, to copy the clothes that they wore, etc. However, it was their
popularity among the wealthy and powerful as working courtesans that made them
considered so chic to the world at large.
Eve
Simon Pugh
<afr...@aol.com> writes
I don't think people should get too hung up with the symbolic purity of
the ermine. We have an alternative explanation in that it is a pun on
her name.
More important is the sensuality of stroking soft furry animals <g>.
Like all these things, there are probably several layers of meaning.
--
Simon Pugh
D. Spencer Hines
explain "Eve" alias "Afropea" ---- alias whatever names, dodges,
sobriquets and net disguises she may employ on USENET and in Life.
"He/She/It" may be _Strumpet_:
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame40.html
[N.B. Please do note the _Caution_. ---- DSH]
Or even _Perv_ posing as _Strumpet ---- soft-pedalling his message:
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame26.html
Deus Vult
"The TV business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic
hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs."
Hunter Thompson
"When it comes to arrogance, power, and lack of accountability,
journalists are probably the only people on the planet who make lawyers
look good."
Steven Brill
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly.
All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with an
attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
given, in writing.
----------
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
"D. Spencer Hines" <D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu> wrote in message
news:...
| There "she" goes again!
|
| "Eve" is trotting out her sexuality and advertising.
|
| Hilarious.
|
| I'm beginning to think that "Eve" is a _he_ in drag.
|
| Deus Vult.
| ----------
|
| D. Spencer Hines
|
| Lux et Veritas et Libertas
|
| Vires et Honor
|
| "Afropea" <afr...@aol.com> wrote in message
| news:20020131120432...@mb-fv.aol.com...
John G Harrison
"Gilmore, Phyllis" <gil...@dcmail1.rand.org> wrote in message
news:gilmore-CAAC7D...@lumberjack.rand.org...
It certainly would in a man. And almost equally probably
would not in 'a lady' - and even a mistress might be a
lady.
Regards
> Just asking--
>
> Phyllis
brumman
> Or even _Perv_ posing as _Strumpet ---- soft-pedalling his message:
>
> http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame26.html
> | Deus Vult.
> | D. Spencer Hines
So at last DSH reveals itself!! Hilarious indeed!
Martin Reboul
D. Spencer Hines wrote...
> There "she" goes again!
>
> "Eve" is trotting out her sexuality and advertising.
>
> Hilarious.
>
> I'm beginning to think that "Eve" is a _he_ in drag.
You sad old fellow David!
Is every woman who fails to be impressed by your syrupy attempts at 'charm',
or stomach churning efforts to 'flirt', automatically a drag queen or a
lesbian?
I don't think so... but it's good to see there's still a trace of sailor
somewhere beneath that stodgy, coceited and anally obsessed exterior.
Martin Reboul
Simon Pugh wrote
> I don't think people should get too hung up with the symbolic purity of
> the ermine. We have an alternative explanation in that it is a pun on
> her name.
>
> More important is the sensuality of stroking soft furry animals <g>.
> Like all these things, there are probably several layers of meaning.
Meeeoww....?