A Popular Handbook to the National Gallery, Volume I, Foreign Schools: Including by Special Permission Notes Collected from the Works of John Ruskin
History
A Popular Handbook to the National Gallery, Volume I, Foreign Schools: Including by Special Permission Notes Collected from the Works of John Ruskin
National Gallery (Great Britain); Painting -- England -- London -- Catalogs
The general characteristics of the Venetian School, as defined by Mr.
Ruskin in the passage above quoted, may be traced both to historical
circumstances and to physical surroundings. Thus the first broad fact
to be noticed about the Venetian School of painting is that it is
later than the Florentine by some hundred years or more. From the point
of view of art, Venice, from her intimate connection as a trading
power with the East, was almost a Byzantine colony. St. Mark's is a
Byzantine church, her earliest palaces are Byzantine palaces. And so,
too, for painting she relied exclusively on a Byzantine supply. It was
not till the latter end of the fourteenth century that the influence
of Giotto's works in the neighbouring town of Padua began to rouse
Venice to do and think for herself in art, instead of letting her
Greek subjects do all for her.[24] But by the time Venetian painters
had acquired any real mastery over their art, Venice was already in a
state of great magnificence; her palaces, with their fronts of white
marble, porphyry, and serpentine, were the admiration of every visitor.
Painters paint what they see around them, and hence at the outset we
find in the Venetian School the rendering of material magnificence
and the brilliant colours that distinguish it throughout. Look, for
instance, at the pictures by a comparatively early Venetian, like
Crivelli (see 602); no other painter of a corresponding age showed such
fondness for fruits and stuffs and canopies and jewels and brilliant
architecture. And then, in the second place, there is the colour of
Venice itself, caused by her position on the lagoons. The Venetians
had no gardens; "but what are the purples and scarlets and blues of
iris, anemone, or columbine, dispersed among deep meadow-grasses
or trained in quiet cloister garden-beds, when compared with that
melodrama of flame and gold and rose and orange and azure, which the
skies and lagoons of Venice yield almost daily to the eye?" (Symonds's
_Renaissance_, iii. 255). But, thirdly, the sea had a further influence
on Venetian painting--it caused at once their love of bodily beauty
and the kind of such beauty that they loved. Compare, for instance, a
typical Venetian "beauty," such as Paris Bordone's (674), with one of
Botticelli's (915): how great is the difference between them! Well,
the sea "tends to induce in us great respect for the whole human body;
for its limbs, as much as for its tongue or its wit.... To put the
helm up at the right moment is the beginning of all cunning, and for
that we need arm and eye;--not tongue. And with this respect for the
body as such, comes also the sailor's preference of massive beauty in
bodily form. The landsmen, among their roses and orange-blossoms, and
chequered shadows of twisted vine, may well please themselves with pale
faces, and finely drawn eyebrows and fantastic braiding of hair. But
from the sweeping glory of the sea we learn to love another kind of
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account