Caravaggio
This is an excerpt from the paper...
If I could paint a masterpiece, it would not look like Caravaggio's "The Supper at Emmaus". I would not confine myself to such a mossy palette, touched in the center with an incarnadine flare. I would not be so concerned with establishing perspective arranging hands and arms and incline of head so that the viewers eye is drawn first into the fictitious depth of the canvas to land on the figure of a youthful Christ. I would not be so concerned with painting my figures as if they were floating in a sea of melting light and shadow. But the fact that Caravaggio did all of these things that I would not do is what defined him as a genius in his time and place.The painting depicts an event from the Gospel of St. Luke (24:13-32). This section of this gospel relates the meeting between two apostles with a resurrected Christ. At first they do not recognize him: It is only when he breaks the bread and blesses it that they understand who it is - but as soon as they see him for who he truly is he vanishes. This painting illustrates what we take to be the moment of that epiphany, when the apostles - and through them their host - recognize the man before them. The use of lighting in this painting is especially important more so even than is typically the case in a work by this artist who was defined by his use of light. Whle most of the great baroque painters achieved their emotional and formal effects at least in part through the manipulation of light, Caravaggio was a master of the use
. . .
ries of those who first saw this painting, and this fact would have made the painter's message of Christ's immanence on earth and involvement in the everyday life of ordinary worshippers, far more powerful (Murray, 1985, p. 82).
This entire painting in imbued with a sense both of the divine and with the ordinary, and this blending must have been intentional on the part of the artist. The faces of the characters, the careful details of wine and water, grapes and other fruits spread out before them, the cap of the inn's host, the way in which there is a tear in the sleeve of one of the apostles and a cockleshell badge of faith on the vest of the other - all of these would have given the painting an immediacy to its first generation of viewers.
This is not the kind of painting that I would paint if I could paint a masterpiece. But that sentiment, of course, contains one of the great truths of art history. While of course we must and should judge works by the standards and interests of our own time and place, we must also judge them by the contemporary standards of the time and place of their creation.
References
Da Caravaggio, M.M. (1999). Caravaggio. London: Dorling Kindersley.
Dutoit, U. (1999). Caravaggio. Bloomington: Un
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Prison Foucault, Da Caravaggio, St Luke, Supper Emmaus, Viking Foucault, Michelangelo's Rembrandt's, Caravaggio Shearman, Northern Italian, Revolution Foucault, Kindersley Dutoit, birth prison, discipline punish birth, discipline punish, punish birth, 1999 caravaggio, foucault argues, concept panopticon, da caravaggio, paint masterpiece, dutoit 1999, shearman 1990, punish birth prison,
Approximate Word count = 1301
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Caravaggio
|