The Famous Depictions of David - Research Paper Example

In looking at the four most famous depictions of David: one each by Donnatello: 1440; Verrochio: 1475; Michaelangelo: 1501; and Bernini: 1624, One can barely imagine that the subject is the same. Donnatello and Verrochio cast their Davids in bronze, while Michaelangelo wand Bernini worked in marble. While the bronze has a certain warrior quality, it does not seem as aesthetically beautiful as the works in marble. Of course, in person the bronze may radiate more warmth, but the marble has more glow. The two early bronzes are still quite beautiful, but not really fitting into the renaissance style. In addition, the four statues are set at different times in the story. They depict David at different ages, and the body style and ornamentation or clothing is also very different in all four statues. Donatello (DONATO DI NICCOLO BARDI) (c. 1386-1466) was a Florentine sculptor. His close study of ancient sculpture and attention to perspective was the beginning of the reform of Florentine art in the quattrocento. He was very influential in his time on local art, especially through his free standing sculpture and his bas relief work. One of the most famous was the marble David of 1408 in Florence by Donnatello. (Rundle, 1999, p. 133) Donnatello’s Bronze David was rumored to have been paired with Judith and Holofernes., another bronze depicting Judith beheading the tyrant king with his own sword after sneaking into his tent.The may have been displayed together in the Medici garden as symbols of their resistance to unification of Italian states. (McHam, 2001). They preferred a Florentine city-state separate from Rome, Italy or the Catholic Church, as they were that hoilders of power here. In a unified state the power would move to the church. These two statues would have been symbolic of the Medici’s love of freedom, and would have represented a distinct affront to the church . David’s total nakedness and anatomically correct depiction would have been offensive. Further, this statue is a young boy in his teens, and because the body language hints vaguely of homosexuality, it was quite controversial when it was first shown (My thoughts on the three davids « this gaudy gilded stage ). The statue shows David after his return from the field against Goliath, with the heavy sword of the Goliath in his right hand and his harp at his feet. Verrocchio, Andrea del (ANDREA DI CIONE) (c. 1435-1488) was another Florentine sculptor, painter, and goldsmith. He was probably a pupil of Donatello. He created many great works in bronze for the Medici family. (Rundle, 1999, p. 402) Verrochio’s David is just as militant as Donnetello’s, and also in bronze. However, this David is a grown man. It is obviously after the contest is won. The head of Goliath is at his feet, though some think it should be between his feet as a symbol of his power (It is separate and movable)(Ren.art.html ). This David also seems a little less manly, and somewhat effeminate in his stance. It makes one wonder about the relationship between Verrochio and Donnatello. Not all statues of David show the head of Goliath, and a research of the bible shows that this was a true depiction of the story. When David challenged Goliath he said that he would cut off his head, and we can assume he meant to use Goliath’s own sword. More was revealed about David, and the lines in the bible by an Israili archeology dig that explained the logic of David volunteering to face Goliath. (Maeir, A., and J. Yellin. 2008.) This had been questioned on the grounds of his station as musician to the kind, not exactly a warrior status. The inscriptions showed that David might have been very young indeed, possibly barely past his Mar Mitzvah age of 13, which can also explain the slightly female look to the sculpture. We might assume that the musician of the king might be effeminate, but not according to their cultural system, and he was also the king’s arms bearer (The tell es-Safi/Gath archaeological project ). Verrochio’s David is fully clothed, though parts of his fighting costume are a bit transparent, showing his thighs and manly chest. Still, there seems to be some sort of undergarment. He is standing on one foot, a pose called contrapposto, in which one part of the body twists away from another part, thus balancing the figure on one foot. Ancient Greek sculptures were the first to do this and then it was revived during the Renaissance, first by Donatello’s David ( 1430s, Bargello, Florence) and then Michelangelo’s David ( 1504, Accademia, Florence). (Rundle, 1999, p. 108) This stance is leading up to the Baroque style which tried to show movement. In 1504 Donatello had established the icon of David depicted as a naked youth, and Michelangelo followed this up with his serenely lovely sculpture of David, a marble giant in Florence, which is relaxed, with the weight on his right leg, and his pelvis tilting to the left. His shoulders compensate by turning to the opposite direction, and the spine curves, almost twisting the torso, almost like a resting stance that is completely wound up ready to fly into action, like a wound up spring. He frowns and glares at the enemy he will destroy, and his figure of half-grown adolescence is almost manly and is very beautiful. ("TEN OF THE GREATEST;," 2010, p. 28) Michelangelo’s Davis is, perhaps, the most well-known of all these sculptures, and it is beautiful indeed. However, it is totally naked and he looks more like a Greek or Roman god than religious figure. The church might have been more accepting of the nudity due to the portrayed age of the youth and also the classical style of the figure, almost angelic. However, a lesser artist might not have gotten away with this. Michelangelo was revered and he tended to push the limits, which often got him in trouble with the church, a major patron of the arts. The style is almost classical or high renaissance, not really showing any movement, though the pose is possibly in anticipation of movement. The body is fairly true to form and realistic. However, we see none of the warrior here, only the athlete. He is seemingly quite at peace and nothing troubles him. Note that his nose is the most Roman of all the statues, and he might have been modeled on a local patron’s face. Marble appears to be a better medium for this kind of figure. We can see more of the details of the sculpture and it appears more lifelike than bronze. Perhaps copper would have worked better than bronze, due to the oxidation of copper turning the metal pale green over time. That might have been better than the bronze for my taste, as I think the bronze is just too dark. Many artists tried to imitate Michelangelo, including Bandinelli, Baccio (1488-1560) a Florentine sculptor who dedicated his life to trying to equal the sculpture of Michelangelo. He also worked for the Medici family and produced wonderful works, including Hercules and Cacus ( 1534), in the Piazza della Signoria in Florence, which was specifically created as a response to Michelangelo’s David. (Rundle, 1999, p. 34) However, until Bernini helped begin the Baroque era, Michelangelo’s David stood alone as a Renaissance achievement in marble. Bernini, a young Florentine sculptor, was commissioned by Cardinal Scipione Borghese to create his study of David. It was to be life sized, and Bernini used his own face as the model for creating David’s life sized head, having someone hold a mirror for him while he worked. Cardinal Barberini Maffeo apparently went so far as to hold a mirror "on several occasions" when he visited the sculptor, which was reported as often, to help him establish points of reference for the features of the life-size marble David that he was carving in his house at the time of Urbans election (Kirwin, 1997, p. 32). The Baroque style is evident in the scintillating movement of the figure. He is not just leaning and twisting, he is winding up for the killing throw. This statue is a 360 degree depiction of David, and seems quite different from every angle. It is not actually known exactly how many angels Bernini considered when he sculpted it, as no drawings have been found. From the front we see his sling ready for the wind-up, rather like a pitcher in baseball about to burn a fastball across the plate (My thoughts on the three davids « this gaudy gilded stage ). His body is leaning away from the intended direction of his throw, putting all his weight and power behind the sling when he will finally let the rock fly. He is leaning away from the direction in which he is looking, the direction in which he will throw. From the right side we can actually see the folded sling and the stance is one of preparation for the final windup before releasing the rock. His feet are widely spaced and angled as if preparing for the last leap that will put his whole weight behind the throw. The spectator will be tempted to lean in to see where he is looking. And the audience can feel the tension and power in this figure. This is typical of the baroque style which moves to realism and tries to incorporate movement and detail into a 360 degree view sculpture. Other sculptures are realistic from all sides, but meant to be viewed from only one. This type of sculpture should be displayed so that the audience can walk all the way around it. From the left side we see how far David is really leaning, almost a crouch as he readies the sling. We see the extreme extent of the twisting of the body, almost like a discus thrower. We can imagine where he will move and how much power he will put into his throw. The look on his face of extreme concentration shows his intense focus upon Goliath. His brow is deeply furrowed as he strains to hold the delicately balanced stance at just the right point to get maximum power from his arm. He is fully clothed, though he has discarded the heavy armor loaned him by the king. He is simply dressed in a shift and has no protection from an enemy sword. He did not expect to meet one. This warrior is also young, but in looking at the muscle structure, the shoulders and chest, we see that he is definitely a grown man. This depiction is likely older than the boy described in the bible. However, the look and stance and the fact that he is not naked satisfied the requirements of the church for religious art of the time. Following the split with protestant sects with England and Germany, the church took a very puritanical view of nudity. The Council of Trent was held to respond to the Protestant Reformation and the 25th edict stated that, “... all lasciviousness be avoided; in such wise that figures shall not be painted or adorned with a beauty exciting to lust...”(CT25 ) Therefore, nudity was simply banned, even the newborn Jesus was shown clothed. The counter reformation of the Catholic Church also decreed that no work of art could be displayed in a church unless previously approved by the Bishop. Since the new rules of the council eliminated absentee bishops, this was practical. Therefore, while the baroque period ushered in realism in art, especially Protestant art, Catholic religious art was restricted by moral considerations. The depiction of David by Michelangelo was nude and beautiful, and would have broken the rule that allowed that no work of art should excite lust. However, Bernini’s statue, while not very well clothed, certainly does not excite lust. We tend to admire him, and really admire his body and athleticism, but he is not a sexually charge figure like the other three. He is dynamic and exciting and one might say he is inspired by the fervor of his faith in God. This would have been a very acceptable depiction of a bible hero. Donnatello’s earlier marble David of 1408 would have been acceptable to the counter reformation church, as David is fully clothed, and he is not in any way lascivious, but simply just a young boy with curly hair. If we did not know this was David, I am not sure we could tell. However, this statue appears to need a bit of cleaning. It is pure renaissance style, classical still poses in the Greco-Roman style and dressed like a god. In all of these sculptures of David, the last by Bernini is the most exciting. The early sculpture above is beautiful, but static. Donnatello depicted more of the narrative of the original story in the weapons and the lyre. Verrochio, a student of Donnatello, took it a step further and add the head of Goliath, rather cleverly separates from the statue itself. Michelangelo capitalized upon the these works, and produced a superb marble David in high renaissance style, beautifully classic and totally nude, However, he is a still beauty with no movement except a slight twist in his stance. Finally, Bernini produced the masterpiece of the age in his Baroque David, fully clothed and ready to spring to life. With the post reformation church making new rules for religious art and its display in churches, artists had to respond with acceptable depictions of religious figures and events without braking the moral rules for purity and godliness. This David is as one and the same time awe inspiringly beautiful and excitingly energetic. An absolute miracle of sculpture and almost fervently religious, while staying very realistically human. One can view Bernini’s David from any angle and see something entirely different. The statue almost appears to move and it has tremendous power to invoke deep feelings and emotional response. We can see in it a manly hero and a young warrior of the God of Israel. It is perfectly balanced and induces the viewer to walk all the way around in order to inspect what appears to be a real live man flash frozen in stone as he is about to make the world’s most famous conquest. As the sculpture appears in Florence one might actually not be surprised to see it suddenly fling a stone into the crowd. The face and form of this David are perfection, and even the cloth of his garments appears to be falling into place in soft folds as we watch. Bernini’s David ushered in the Baroque Era and it is still one of its most important symbols. References CT25 Retrieved 11/30/2011, 2011, from http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct25.html Kirwin, W. C. (1997). Powers Matchless: The Pontificate of Urban VIII, the Baldachin, and Gian Lorenzo Bernini. New York: Peter Lang. Maeir, A., and J. Yellin. 2008. Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis of selected pottery from Tel Beth Shean and the Central Jordan Valley. In Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean 1989-1996, Volume II: The Middle and Late Bronze Age Strata in Area R, ed. A. Mazar and R. Mullins, 554-71. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. McHam, S. B. (2001). Donatellos bronze david and judith as metaphors of medici rule in florence. Art Bulletin, 83(1), 32. My thoughts on the three davids « this gaudy gilded stage Retrieved 11/29/2011, 2011, from http://thisgaudygildedstage.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/my-thoughts-on-the-three-davids/ Ren.art.html Retrieved 11/29/2011, 2011, from http://castinet.castilleja.org/private/faculty/peggy_mckee/renaissance_art/ren.art.html Rundle, D. (Ed.). (1999). The Hutchinson Encyclopedia of the Renaissance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. The tell es-Safi/Gath archaeological project Retrieved 11/30/2011, 2011, from http://faculty.biu.ac.il/~maeira/ TEN OF THE GREATEST; Sculptures. (2010, August 29). The Mail on Sunday (London, England), p. 28. Read More