Weniger ist Mehr?

Michelangelo hat seine weltberühmte David-Skulptur aus einem einzigen Block Carrara-Marmor geschlagen. Als er gefragt wurde, wie er dabei vorgegangen sei, soll er geantwortet haben: „Ganz einfach: Ich habe alles weggeschlagen, was nicht David war.“

Das Überflüssige wegnehmen, möglichst alles auf das Wesentliche reduzieren: Dies scheint eine sinnvolle Empfehlung für viele Lebensbereiche zu sein, ganz egal ob es sich dabei um Schminke, den eigenen Satzbau oder die Innengestaltung des neuen Badezimmers handelt.

Italienische Vase aus dem späten 16. Jahrhundert, Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Modern Arts

Doch wo beginnt überflüssiger Luxus und was ist ein nettes Extra? Wo fängt der Kitsch an und was ist ein Klassiker? Gerade im Zusammenhang mit Designobjekten stellt sich oft die Frage: Ist das nun Kunst oder kann das weg?

Scarpe, servo delle mie brame, siete le più belle

Non è una novità che alla major parte delle donne piacciono le scarpe. Rappresentano per noi, ragazze,  una specie di gioielli che si scelgono secondo il vestito portato. Le scarpe hanno una dimenzione estetica essentiale e accentuano il glamour. Chi, all’esempio di Carrie Bradshaw non ha mai sognato di poter avere un bellissimo dressing pieno di scarpe ? Chi, non ha mai passato una serata sofferendo di male di piede incredibile perché le sue scarpe non erano comode pero ... erano belle ?

A me piacciono particolarmente i tacchi e le sandale d’estate. Perché ? I tacchi mi rendono più alta, mi stendono la  “silhouette” e  le gambe e sono simbolo di feminità e di glamour. E le sandale (senza tacchi) perché d’estate, mi piace anche essere al mio agio.

 



Scarpe di donna, Italia, XVII secolo, Musée International de la Chaussure, Romans.



Scarpe « Décolleté » di Marylin Monroe, decorate di strass rosso Swarosvki, create da S. Ferragamo per il film Let’s make love di George Cukor in 1960, Museo di Ferragamo, Firenze.

 

Quando ero piccola, mia mamma mi diceva : “ Impari a conoscere un’uomo quando guardi le sue scarpe. Se sono pulite, è ordinato”. Questa frase mi è rimasta in testa durante anni. Non, non è vero. La verità è che l’avevo dimenticata fino al mio arrivo in Italia cinque anni fa. Per essere precisa mi è tornata in testa il 17 settembre 2007, a Parma. Stavo aspettando, seduta su un banco con le mie valigie, che l’ufficio che mi doveva ospitare aprisse, chiedendomi cosa facevo lì, e guardando o piuttosto dovrei dire ”ammirando” la gente andare al lavoro, (gente = uomini), perché erano le 8 di mattina. Erano bellissimi, pantaloni neri, camicie bianche, capelli gominati (si si è vero !). Mi stavo già meravigliando quando il mio sguardo ha derivato verso un super bel uomo, alto, con gli occhi azzuri, capelli chiari, viso di angelo. Avrebbe potuto essere modello di diciamo, fragranza. Era perfetto ragazze! Sfortunatamente, il mio godimento è stato molto breve : non so assolutamente perché i miei occhi si sono spostati sulle sue scarpe. Da questo momento il mondo è crollato attorno da me. Questo modello cosi bello portava delle scarpe vecchie di trent’anni, danneggiate e ovviamente non lucidate. Per essere onesta, di solito non mi attaco a queste cose pero, devo ammettere che sono rimasta delusa e frustata. Come, un’uomo cosi chic poteva arrischiarsi a portare scarpe antiche? Magari pensava che non si vedessero, magari era in ritardo e non aveva visto quale scarpe stava mettendo... Ho provato di dargli mille ragioni.. ma, non, nessuna scusa.

Moralità : ragazzi, attento! La scelta delle scarpe non deve essere sbadata. Non pensare MAI che le ragazze non ci fanno attenzione perché vi guardiamo dall’alto in basso Signori...

 



Scarpe di Maurice Chevalier, portate al teatro degli Champs-Elysées, Musée international de la Chaussure, Romans.

 

Se vi piacciono le scarpe, la mostra del Metropolitan Museum di New York vi apre generosamente le sue porte. Se purtroppo vi è impossible attraversare l’Oceano Atlantico, potete consultare il libro Shoes, pubblicato da Parkstone International.

Musings... and Matisse

How does one gain immortality these days? No, this is actually a serious question! For the Ancient Egyptians, they took the important person’s corpse, removed the intestines and the other major decomposable parts (excepting the heart of course... every rookie embalmer knows that!), dried the body out with natron*, stuffed it with sawdust, wrapped it in linen, placed it in a couple of coffins, and then put it inside a large sarcophagus**. Easy. Then, they left the now-mummified body, erected a gigantic marking stone (obviously why the pyramids were built), and voila: today practically everybody and their grandmother knows the name of Tutankhamen.  Not bad for a 5,000 year-old mummy!

However, in today’s society many people like to achieve fame, notoriety, and assurance of impending immortality (or at least of an immortalised image) whilst they’re still alive. I know, weird, right?! Thus, we are faced with the likes of Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian (congratulations on the baby news by the way).


Johannes Vermeer
Girl with a Pearl Earring, c. 1665.
Oil on canvas, 44.5 x 39 cm.
Mauritshuis, The Hague.

Then again, some people achieve fame, notoriety, and assurance of immortality quite involuntarily. How? You might legitimately be wondering. Well, by serving as a muse. For instance, where would Leonardo da Vinci be without the woman who sat for the Mona Lisa? The mysterious girl who was the inspiration for Vermeer’s Girl with a Pearl Earring –brought to further recognition with the 2003 film of the same name, portrayed as she was by Scarlett Johansson. The actress has also been a muse in her own right: to Woody Allen. What started out as collaboration for Match Point (2005), evolved into further collaborations for Scoop (2006), and the lauded Vicky Christina Barcelona (2008). Speaking of Woody Allen, he is the modern master of the muse. Who could forget Dianne Keaton in Annie Hall (1977), or Mia Farrow in Alice (1990)?

In recent art history, Andy Warhol’s great and troubled muse Edie Sedgwick appeared in many of his short films, whilst Kate Moss has become one of art and fashion’s greatest muses. Of greatest note perhaps are the works she inspired from Lucian Freud, Chuck Close, and Banksy.


Henri Matisse
The Italian Woman (L'Italienne)
1916.
Oil on canvas, 116.7 x 89.5 cm.
Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York

Be that as it may, perhaps one of the most under-appreciated muses of art history is Matisse’s muse: Lorette. Before Lorette, Matisse was often to be found painting still life and landscapes. Lorette provided the inspiration for Matisse to develop a rich and flowing colour palette and sense of line. An increased intimacy with the subject can also be seen; over the period of 7-8 months of Lorette’s modelling for Matisse, we see her expressions change from wary to inviting.  With this professional Italian model, Matisse was ready to abandon abstractionism. After painting Lorette around fifty times during the months that she modelled for him, he took his habit of obsessive painting with him to his future collaborations with models.


Henri Matisse
Lorette in a green dress on black background

I believe that it truly can be said that without the influence of Lorette, Matisse might well not have evolved into the same famed and revered artist that we know today. And Lorette? We do not know what became of her, but she is certainly recognised today – and all because of the fact that she was Matisse’s muse.

*Fun fact: did you know natron is 17% baking soda? Kids: Do not try this at home!

** Disclaimer: This is not a step-by-step guide on how to mummify someone in case you were wondering.

To view more of Matisse’s muses, and to see how they influenced his painting, check out the Metropolitan Museum, New York. The exhibition Matisse: In Search of True Paintings is being held until March 17^th 2013. If New York is a little out of the budget, don’t fear! The books Flowers and Still Life by Victoria Charles chart several masters’ work on the subjects, including that of Matisse. Familiarise yourself with the abstract and the use of line, to fully understand and appreciate the brilliant early work of Matisse.

Rome, ville caméléon ?

Rome est symbolique, culturelle et éternelle. Si la ville de la Dolce Vita de Fellini attire toujours aujourd’hui des milliers de touristes c’est parce qu’elle fascine par son passé, par ses vestiges antiques et par sa nourriture (il est bien connu, au niveau gastronomique que l’Italie est une valeur sûre).

Qui a-t-il de plus agréable, après une journée de visites, que de déguster un gelato assis sur les marches de la Piazza di Spagna, ou de boire un apéro à la tombée de la nuit, en regardant le spectacle de la rue, les hommes d’affaires ultra gominés en costard-cravates, chaussures cirées ayant terminé leur journée, les italiennes, féminines à souhait, les groupes de jeunes sur leurs scooters, le tout, accompagné d’un fond sonore mêlant accordéon et  « Ciao, come va ?; Com’è andata la giornata ?; un bicchiere di vino per favore. » 

Cliché ? Certainement. C’est… la dolce vita.

En apparence, Rome fait rêver, et si tout ne vous semble qu’être architecture, sculpture, vestiges romains, beauté et perfection,  alors détrompez-vous ! Rome possède aussi un passé sombre et des entrailles que Victor Hugo dans les Châtiments, qualifiait de « ténèbres ». Par entrailles j’entends les égouts de Rome, et la Cloaca Maxima, le canal qui, dans la Rome Antique desservait le forum romain et servait à emporter les eaux pluviales et les immondices de la ville. Autant dire qu’avant que celle-ci ne soit couverte, la capitale italienne était la porte ouverte à de nombreux problèmes d’insalubrité, et d’épidémies.

Si la Rome terrestre est un monde, la Rome souterraine en est un autre. Un enfer sombre, qui s’étend sur des kilomètres, et qui s’ouvre parfois sous les pieds des passants. Ce monde obscur, fétide, boueux, royaume des rongeurs se transforme en ruisseau lorsqu’il pleut. Ce monde du néant, ou seul le bruit des bêtes se fait entendre, recueille tous les vices de Rome. On en oublierait presque que quelques mètres au-dessus de cet antre, se trouve une Rome vivante, bruyante, chaotique dans laquelle ont œuvré de nombreux artistes ;  le Colisée,  le forum antique, le Vatican, la Basilique Saint Pierre et la Pietà de Michel-Ange ; la Fontaine de Trevi ; la Piazza Navona et la Fontaine des 4 Fleuves du Bernin.


Bernini, la place Saint Pierre, Vatican


Fellini, La Dolce Vita, Marcello Mastroianni et Aanita Ekberg

Rome ville diabolique, Rome ville historique et Rome vedette de cinéma. Fellini sera sans aucun doute l’un des premiers la filmer. La Dolce Vita est un éloge de la capitale italienne et Fellini, en y faisant déambuler ses personnages nous en montre les plus beaux recoins,  notamment la fontaine de Trevi avec cette célèbre scène que je ne peux m’empêcher de comparer à  l’une des œuvres du Bernin. Le Bernin qui était à la sculpture ce que Fellini était au cinéma, c'est-à-dire un artiste aux multiples facettes, doté d’une virtuosité technique incroyable. Ses sculptures majoritairement de thèmes bibliques possèdent un effet dramatique et théâtral. L’expression est parfois caricaturale, tout comme l’était le caractère de certains personnages de Fellini, si bien que l’on en arriverait  presque à comparer la Sylvia (Aanita Ekberg) « en extase » de Fellini dans cette fameuse scène, à l’Extase de la sainte Thérèse du Bernin.


Le Bernin, L’Extase de sainte- Thérèse, 1652,
Chapelle Cornaro de l'église Santa Maria


Fellini, La Dolce Vita, 1960. Della Vittoria à Rome.


Le Bernin, Fontaine des 4 Fleuves, 1648 - 1651, Piazza Navona, Rome

Rome reste LA ville italienne par excellence et si aujourd’hui Fellini, Mastroianni, Michel-Ange et le Bernin ne sont plus, d’autres ont pris la relève. L’un des derniers en date : Tom Hanks dans le film Anges et Démons de Ron Howard.

Si vous avez l’opportunité d’être à New York d’ici Janvier 2013, ne ratez pas l’exposition Bernini Sculpting in Clay  du 3 octobre 2012 au 6 janvier 2013, au Metropolitan Museum. Prenez le temps d’aller apprécier les esquisses en argiles de ce qui représente aujourd’hui les chefs d’œuvres de la capitale Romaine, puis à l’occasion pourquoi ne pas vous y rendre lors d’un éventuel futur voyage ! Vous pouvez aussi consulter le livre L’Art Baroque de Victoria Charles.

Bernini: The Beauty and The Beast

Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Fontana della Barcaccia. c. 1623. Marble. Piazza di Spagna, Rome, Italy

Rome is the city of light, certainly, but it is also the city of water. Tourists may visit for the city’s celebrated history and architecture, but they leave entranced by the babbling fountains which dot the city like stars. What most don’t realize is that most of those fountains were designed by the same man: the astoundingly talented Gian Lorenzo Bernini.

Immortalized in countless great works of cinema, from Frederico Felini’s La Dolce Vita to Woody Allen’s To Rome With Love, Bernini’s fountains are essential to the character of this most romantic of cities. His Fontana della Barcaccia on the Spanish Steps even provided the backdrop for Gregory Peck and Audry Hepburn to meet cute in Roman Holiday, and has been photographed by countless tourists attempting capture a uniquely Italian image. In many ways, modern Rome is the city Bernini built.

Still, as influential as he is today, Bernini’s path to artistic immortality was not smooth. In the seventeenth century when he was a young man he was quite a controversial figure, his artistic genius at times overshadowed by the scandals that surrounded him.


Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Self-Portrait as a Young Man. c. 1623. Oil on canvas, 62x46 cm. Galleria Borghese, Rome, Italy

Bernini was the darling of the art world from the age of eight, when Pope Paul V boasted that the child would be “The Michelangelo of his century.” And as he grew up, and his skills increased, so did his social success. Beloved by the wealthiest families in Italy, and a favourite of the church, Bernini led a charmed life. At least, until he met Constanza Buanerelli.

Constanza was the wife of Bernini’s assistant Matteo, a young and lovely woman whose freshness and charm immediately won over the artist. He was inspired by her sensuality, and she quickly became his muse, her post-coital rumple immortalized in stone in one of his most celebrated busts.


Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Bust of Constanza Buonarelli. c. 1635. Marble, 72 cm. Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence, Italy

Alas, their happiness was brief. Bernini was an extremely jealous lover, infuriated that he was forced to share Constanza with her husband. He repeatedly insulted the hapless Matteo to such a great extent that his affair with Constanza became a matter of common knowledge, and she was jailed for adultery. Protected by his powerful friends, Bernini himself got off scot free.

Constanza, tired of her lover’s covetousness, took her revenge by beginning an affair with his brother. Enraged, Bernini followed the pair to the steps of St. Peter’s basilica, the Pope’s seat of power, whose interior he had so masterfully designed years before. He beat his brother half to death with an iron rod, and bribed a servant to slash Constanza’s face with a razor, destroying the beauty that had once captivated him.

Pope Urban VIII used his power to get Bernini out of trouble, even excusing the 3000 scudi fee the court leveled against him. But the pope was tired of helping the bad boy artist out of romantic scrapes, and this time his help came with a price. He forced Bernini to marry a virtuous woman of the church’s choosing, a union that was by all accounts a happy one, lasting decades and producing eleven children.

Still, Bernini never sculpted his wife. Maybe he had learned his lesson with Constanza, his great love and his muse, whose faithless beauty he so fatally immortalized.

Those of you lucky enough to be in New York should make sure to check out Bernini: Sculpting in Clay at the world famous Metropolitan Museum of Art from October 3, 2012 to January 6, 2013. Or to follow along at home, and get critical insight into Bernini’s controversial life and work, check out our ebooks on Sculpture and Baroque Art, both written by celebrated art historian Victoria Charles.

-George Kostrowitzky

Dürer: the Mathematical Artist

I have long considered the artist and the mathematician to be incompatible specimens; geeks and creatives; oil and water. But artists such as Dürer, accomplished in both art and mathematics, certainly make a good case against my point of view.

German Renaissance printmaker Albrecht Dürer made significant contributions to mathematics in literature, publishing works about the principles of mathematics, perspective and ideal proportions. He succeeded at a time when other great thinkers, including polymaths Leonardo da Vinci and Piero della Francesca were thinking in new ways, combining art with mathematics as a way of expressing an ‘ultimate truth’. Nothing conveys Dürer’s capacity for combining the two like his famous engraving Melancholia I (1514):



Scholars have spent centuries analysing the truncated ‘rhombohedron’ (a kind of leaning cube shape) on the left of the image, as the exact geometry of the solid depicted is a subject of some academic debate (all of which involve ratio and angle calculations – not the typical ponderings of an arty type). ‘Dürer’s Solid’, as it is now known, is now part of a larger mathematical theory called the ‘Dürer Graph’ – his mathematical influence remains rife today.

Whatever inspired the creation this scientific art (or artistic science)? It seems the general feeling amongst the artist/mathematician hybrids is that mathematics makes art more beautiful.  The ‘Golden Ratio’ for example, applied by the Ancient Egyptians for the building of the pyramids, was regarded as being ‘aesthetically pleasing’.

Does mathematics really enhance art? The jury is still out.

Get to know Dürer and a wealth of other European artists in Dürer and Beyond: Central European Drawings 1400-1700 at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, exhibiting until the 3^rd September 2012. Alternatively, treat yourself to Dürer's most influential works with this beautifully illustrated high-quality art book.

The Self-Indulgence of the Self-Portrait

The self-portrait: an frank insight into the soul of an artist or a web of lies?

Self-Portraits are the epicentre of the Metropolitan Museum's current exhibition: ‘Rembrandt and Degas: Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man’, presenting early self-portraits by the artists side by side for the first time. Featured below: left, Rembrandt van Rijn, Sheet of Studies with Self-Portrait (detail), 1630-1634 and right, Edgar Degas, Self-Portrait (detail), c. 1855-1857:



With the mass production of improved glass mirrors, the Early Renaissance in the mid-15^th century saw a wave of self-portraits amongst painters, sculptors, and printmakers alike. A range of self-depictions were produced, from the humble sketch to extravagant biblical scenes, featuring, you guessed it, themselves. Francisco de Zurbarán’s 17^th century painting Saint Luke as a Painter before Christ on the Cross is widely believed to picture himself as St Luke:



It is said that self-portraiture requires a great deal of artistic skill and self-awareness, while exposing one’s own vulnerabilities as both an artist and subject. But how accurate were these self-portraits?

I don’t claim any validity in comparing such a practice in the 15^th century to today – photography means there is less need to spend months and years nurturing pictorial evidence of one’s own appearance for the sake of PR.

But producing such work in the 21^st century would likely bring about accusations of self-obsession or even criticism for stretching the truth of our own good looks – was this really much different in the 15^th century? The temptation to adjust the odd flaw must remain rife in such a practice – a slightly smaller nose or an eradicated mole can be yours at the mere flick of a brush.

Art critics have noted that a trait common to female self-portraits is that they are featured in much smarter attire than they would probably actually be painting in, perhaps indicating some deviance from the mirror image they saw before them. For example, this is a self-portrait by Adelaide Labille-Guiard, Self-Portrait with Two Pupils 1785 – would you want to splash your watercolours on that finery?



Self-portraits also range to the rather more controversial, such as those of Egon Schiele’s collection of self-depictions, which have led to countless medical diagnoses of his mental and sexual health. By this measure, self-portraits are more than paintings; they also provide insight into the artists themselves.

However, reminiscent of the Facebook profile picture (blasphemous!), self-portraits are, and have always been, what the artist wants us to see of them.  This is what they would like us to perceive of their personality and character, which by human nature is likely to differ from who they actually were.

Self-portraits provide a fascinating angle on a work of art.  We can undoubtedly take a lot more from a self-portrait than we can from one man’s portrait of another, but can we really believe what they convey?

For more information about the exhibition, please visit the Metropolitan Museum of Art's website.  For  high quality ebooks about Schiele, Degas and a host of other legendary artists, visit ebook-gallery.com.