Attention Deficit Disorder; the curse/blessing of the Renaissance?

Receiving a glimpse into the superlative and highly laudatory world of Giorgio Vasari’s appreciation for Leonardo da Vinci has “started me knowing something I already knew.”  (a line from one of my favorite blues bands back home.  Apparently I am missing America!) Leonardo was undoubtedly an amazing man, perhaps the culmination of all of humanity’s hard earned direction towards perfection.  The Renaissance aim towards perfection in all aspects though causes me pause in wonder.  It seems in many situations of our current time, if someone is very gifted in school but incapable of concentrating on many things long enough to complete them, many times their parents are quick to lock them in a room with a bottle of Ridlin and a pencil in hand.  This focus on the ideal of achieving perfection in all realms, the true embodiment of the Renaissance man, seems unattainable without the very “disorder” that our society is so quick to closet and attempt to control.  ADD is indeed a serious case that can prove detrimental to the mental health of many students in class, yet it was utterly laudable in the Renaissance mindset for a man to shift back and forth between different topics, often times leaving those items uncompleted and ideas half thought.  Now this is certainly my interpretation of Vasari’s interpretation of Leonardo’s life.  Whereas Vasari chose to interpret this breakdown of completion as an attribute of Leonardo’s genius and ensuing incapability to bring his hand into the same light as his mind.  But it seems to be the only way that any human being could feasibly attain the variance in interest necessary in the ideal man of the Renaissance.  Think about it!  Leonardo was talented in anatomy, art, sculpture, sketching, physics, inventing, writing backwards, playing music, singing music, and who knows what else!  I understand that he was described as something that was just formed by God's hands here on earth as opposed to being born like the rest of us for a reason!  But as this summer semester comes to an end I am reminded of a question that I asked myself some short five and a half weeks ago: what is a Renaissance man and is that goal obtainable?  Honestly, having been in this Renaissance mindset, worldview, and birthplace, I am beginning to embrace its feasibility as something real.  It is indeed something powerful and mighty: the human potential for achievement is a limitless un-cappable thing.  I have secretly worked so hard to be opposed to the ideas of the Renaissance this entire trip.  Not so much because I disagree with it but rather in attempts to form my own distinct argument, to be right and unique; a daisy in a field of tulips.  And yet there is something so infectious and righteous about this thing called the Renaissance that I can see why it is still all about me today, why I was raised and encouraged to pursue a liberal arts education. It is such an amazing, formative, and transformative kind of thought process.  Perhaps it is not right.  Perhaps humanity is not an utterly unlimited thing and there is something to be said for the atrocities have committed to work against the humanism, secularism, Creative historical self consciousness, and especially the virtuosity of the individualist approach.  But imagine the potential!  I have consistently been a cynic for many of the latter half of my life.  It's easier to not expect good and then just to be surprised when the good occurrences actually take place.  And yet this is something that the Renaissance mindset doesn't see as necessary.  Almost in an ultimate and superlative optimist mindset, the Renaissance thinkers like Castiglione, Ficino, and the even Vasari here recognize and laud the capability of reaching a perfect kind of humanity: the embodiment of humanism.  This produces something in me I never thought possible.  I expect humanity to become something greater and that they can!  Not just to make it into heaven either!  There is a reason to be a good civic individual, to become something of a versatile and virtuous human for this place, to meet the past, embrace it in education and enhance it and make it something for the better.  Mayhaps ADD is necessary to achieve all of this, the optimal balance of humanism, secularism, historical self consciousness, and individualism, but perhaps that is why our generation is so riddled with it!?  Perhaps this is indeed the optimal time for the rebirth of rebirth; to become once more what we once were to do once again the things that are no longer done.

Relics: A question of significance for the Renaissance

What function do relics serve within the religious worldview?  Is the opal ring of Mary meant to establish some kind of religious pilgrimage destination?  Does the preserved arm of Karl Der Grosse lead to the forgiveness of sins?  Marco, our Assisi guide, established several of the functional norms for a Christian relic and reliquary in the mindset of the past.  To them, the relics contain some of the holiness of the saint that the bone fragments or significant item pertained to.  As a result, the city to which the relic belongs is seen as protected and guarded especially by the spirit, store house of merit, and prayers of the respective saint.  This protection met the likelihood of pestilence, war and destruction and dismantled it outright.  The product instilled faith, courage, and hope in the general masses.  The Perugians took great pride in their possession of the grandiose marriage ring of Mary in their possession.  As did the inhabitants of Assisi to possess the habit, hair, prayer chords and various other paraphernalia of the early 13^th century saints, Francesco and Chiara.  But with the increasing secularization and understanding of reality’s containment within this plain of becoming as opposed to the Platonic interpretation of the Christian God’s possession of all true forms in his presence, we must ask, what function have the relics continued to serve?  At some point it seems obvious that as people begin to understand the human body better, recognizing, as did Leonardo da Vinci, the true intricacies of its build as well as its pathways to ailments, the people were much less likely to receive items of the past saints to provide protection.  I care to argue that this led to the product that can be witnessed in today’s society: no longer does the relic serve the same purpose it once did.  Now perhaps more than the past, it is simply an item intended for devotion towards the figure and a reminder of what their function was in relation to Christianity.  What then, though can I say is to blame, the main cause for this shift in understanding something as significant as a relic?  What between the modern age and the Medieval period is to blame for such an occurrence? Perhaps the secularism of the Renaissance played a heavy part in the shifting sands thereof.  It seems in all likely hood that a different understanding of the way the world functions and the direction towards which all things point would engender this difference in comprehension of relics!  The secularism of the Renaissance would perhaps recognize that people are not stricken ill from the wrath of God but perhaps is the result of something more earthly bound.  Therefore the necessity of relics in the protection of a state is largely mitigated by this turn of events.  Similarly the growing belief in humanity’s capabilities, the greater understanding of the design and operation of the human body, would evince a sort of humanism playing a hand in the significance of relics.  This also may explain a different sort of understanding of the function of saints in general.  Whereas sainthood seemed entirely aimed at the ethereal before the Renaissance, the painting of the Renaissance evinces a sort of ethereal grounding of those peoples, so that no longer are people considering saints as something entirely of another plain, but perhaps their function has shifted to an importance of comprehension of this time and space instead.  Thus the secularist and humanist tendencies of the Renaissance provide the fulcrum to redirect the attention and significance of the relics.  Today, relics serve a different purpose than that which they first inhabited.  Perhaps it is my Baptist understanding of the nature of idolatry and iconography, but I can distinctly recall earlier this trip commenting to one of my professors the idolatrous nature of some of the reliquaries in the Medici chapel in Firenze.  Though I was frustrated with being chastised at the time, I have naught but shear joy at the corrections I received therein, for the lessons I learned have utterly shifted my view of relics.  By no means would I confess any sort medieval comprehension of the sort of mystical prowess of relics (the absence thereof likely evincing the sort of soft rationalism so oft related to Renaissance thinking) but the religious significance they contain for me goes without limit.  These religious items deserve and warrant not only my utmost respect, but conjure in me some sort of religious appreciation and devotion sparked a-new in the effective hands of the saints now bygone.  The result is an un-protestant view of these “idols” turned icons, though perhaps more Renaissance inspired appreciation as opposed to that sported by the medieval period.

The Primary Portal to the Divine Frenzy

It has taken me sometime to locate the significance of music in the renaissance.  Perhaps part of it has been the inherently visually inclined nature of our society in the ubiquitous television and motion pictures.  Families are considered entirely underprivileged and out cast if they miss the most recent programs or can’t afford their own television.  The result has engendered a societal understanding that is largely visually focused and secondarily concerned with auditory input.  But perhaps this is a subject best reserved for later discussions.  The Renaissance worldview produces an entirely other understanding of these components:  the world of forms is most easily accessed through the auditory pathway, so that this was the preferred venue of performance (to some extent).  The Renaissance holds a kind of rebirth of this Grecian ideal, in the sense that it is established in reflecting the importance of the harmonies of the universe.  The perfect motions of the heavens, in their perfected circular flight patterns was thought to be accompanied by a series of harmonious and perfect sounds, according to the Courtier written by Castiglione.  What can be done with this?  How is it possible for humanity to attain and mimic perfection?  The fact that the Renaissance thinkers saw this as a possibility evinces their extreme humanism, in recognition of mankind’s capability to achieve unlimited ambitions.  It is interesting how the methodology applied to music in the Renaissance truly reflects the course’s delineated themes of the Renaissance: individualism, humanism, secularism, and historical self-consciousness.  The appreciation for at least the versatile aspect of individualism is very strong in the composition of Renaissance composers, in that peoples are no longer continuing the long-standing tradition of   monotonous plain chant in the church or else where, but begin to incorporate a versatility in ranges and parts: often times hopping around in response to one another in frattolas and working in harmony as if mimicking the patterns of a wave for the madrigal compositions.  The ensuing versatility led to a true sense of Creativity in that the people knew that what music they were making was something entirely different, new and worthy of mention.  Though it was based off the prime ideals achieved in ancient Greece, at least the recorded ideals of pursuing a controlled balance along with a precise mimicry of the perfect proportions in Pythagorean calculations, there was something significantly new and innovative in their works.  No longer did the music have to follow a direct sense of direction in the church.  Not every song is any longer caught up in fields of the trinity and new ways of pronouncing the dogma of the church in respect to the Virgin Mary and the likes.  Rather, people adapt Petrarch’s texts, which are arguably anything but Christian, through text-painting, controlled dynamics, precise emotional response that is not over expressed but in a very classical-British-queen style states emotions simply, “I am feeling dismayed,” without an emotional expression, as well as a growing respect for trained tempos and pleasing sounds for the ear (especially during the high Renaissance).  The emergence of secularism can even be seen in the note grouping seen in Renaissance music!  Because peoples grouped in threes for the significance of the Trinity before the Renaissance, we can see the exceedingly ecclesiastical mindset occupying peoples of those times.  And yet this seems not the case for Renaissance composers, who used whichever tempo matched the text best for each specific piece!  What a Creative concept!  Along with this Creative aspect we also witness the resurgence of literature as the primary vessel of composition, the controlled expressions, the sophistication in style and form, as well as the use of vernacular in music produces an utterly new respect for local speech over and against those of the church in pure Latin (another example of secularism)!  We therefore see evinced a sort of obvious grouping in the music of the Renaissance as an utter embodiment of all things crucial to our renaissance mindset.  This is only fitting in recognition that the auditory senses are the quickest access point to the world of forms, so that the pure form of music should be composed of the forms most crucial to the Renaissance worldview: A divine musical frenzy leading the way for the divine Renaissance frenzy.

It's always uphill to Jerusalem...I mean Assisi

I made an admittedly unexpected pilgrimage to the city of peace this weekend.  I hopped on the train with a certain determination to witness the glorious grandeur of that far and distant dome that our tour guide pointed out just a week ago during our whirl wind tour of Assisi.  Legend has it that this is the church that Saint Francis found in ruins and rebuilt.  The original is of course very small, no bigger than a class room I take Italian in daily.  And yet the precious appeal of the place was astronomical.  Saint Francis of Assisi was indeed not a part of the Renaissance dates as we have listed them, between 1350-1600.  But I wonder how much of his influence and this locale end up embodying many of the Renaissance themes.  The humanism present in much of Francis' theology is also present in the legends surrounding him, his disciples, and their times.  I realize that many people will find my opinions here disagreeable, because these peoples have been canonized and the prowess of saints will always supersede those of regular humans.  This is a valid point but their acts took place while they were still humans here on earth (if one will allow me to employ my rudimentary understanding of sainthood) so that those things enacted by Saint Francis and his contemporaries very well embody the humanism they purported.  Saint Francis was granted a tiny and dilapidated church in the middle of a wooded area off of Assisi and he rebuilt it on his own!  The amazing structure is a thing worthy of note.  The fact that the legend focuses on one man's ability to rebuild a church, and perhaps his capability to rebuild, reclaim, and reform the crumbling church of Christ signifies a rather Humanist understanding of his capabilities.

Much adornment has been laced upon the structure over the decades in a fashion that truly evinces the significance of this site to Franciscan fanatics.  Though much has been added to the structure, including frescoes, inside and out, as well as a miniature medieval belfry, the simplicity and stoutness of the tiny structure truly flaunts the potency of Saint Francis' message.  As Marco informed us, Saint Francis' elevated view of nature's equivalence to humanity, that in some sense we are all one in the same relative family, led to a humanistic revolution that permits access into a brand new world of reborn humanism.  One of the aforementioned frescoes is as follows:

This imagery is at the front of the tiny chapel, the Porziuncola, and as beautiful as it is, rightly reflects many of the artistic endeavors that would later be perfected in higher Renaissance times. Constructed several hundred years after Francis' death, Prete Illario da Viterbo crafted this in 1393, near the beginning of the Renaissance and though it still carries some of the characteristics of its past predecessors, it is unique in that the stacking of the angels is intentionally more realistic as if these angels were more bound by real life gravity instead of just randomly arranged in convenient patterns around the Lord and Madonna.

We also witness a great implicit humanism at the hand (feet and side, ha!) of Francis' stigmatic blessing.  As portrayed by Giotto, the scene draws a direct connection between the conventionally seen Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, whom those with a higher Christology might deem God himself embodied here on earth is passing his afflictions on to Saint Francis, as yet a mere mortal.  The capability of a human to so greatly reflect not only a god but the God in Jesus is something beyond what many humanists would be willing to say about humanities capabilities in general.  Included with this notion of humanism is Francis' grandiose capability to live on means most humans would collapse under.  The portrayal of Saint Francis as one whom poverty and hunger cannot afflict, but rather as something he embraces, pushes the limits of humanity to something we perhaps have not seen before.

But what really hit me last Saturday is the sort of understanding of Assisi's other name: the city of Peace. Of all the great respects and admirations I have for Saint Francis, I laud his broad admonishments towards peace.  Loving brothers and sisters over and against the fighting that cleft in twain so many locales through out Europe for centuries.  His policies towards obedience, chastity, and poverty are the gateways to unifying and achieving this transformational kind of peace.  To do just a bit of elaboration on my point here:  it is through being poor, avoiding unnecessary ornamentation, (chaste), and obedient to other in loving them as your family that you are capable to escape the torturous world that is war and hatred.  In something altogether ground breaking, it seems that Saint Francis' interaction with "San Chiara" (Saint Claire) also shows a sort of inventive new way to understand humanity and witness the fact that a woman is indeed capable of goodness at the same level as a man.  In many regards this motion is witness to Francis' Creativity in enacting a vivid and potent Historical self consciousness that lingers even to this day, thank God, to inspire me!

Secular and Individualistic, I think Saint Francis and his order or not.  But without their Creative sense of world comprehension as well as loving humanism, the world of the Renaissance may not have been.

Renaissance: Waiting for (re)rebirth or lingering yet?

There seems to be this kind of conception within the schools of thought I have received instruction from that the Renaissance is a thing of the past, a state that has an effect on us daily however it does not command any kind of continuing hold over the modern world in most senses of the term.  And yet my experiences in the Italian country lend themselves to other conclusions.  Though it is admittedly no longer depicted in sculpture or Renaissance-esque frescoes, there are still vast quantities of expressed humanism.  Nudity in respect to the ideal body is much more widely accepted here in Italy than any place I have experienced in the United States of America.  This could be the result of my relatively limited experiences with the variety of our many states or it could be a vestige of the once very vivacious vitality of the Renaissance now vivified in the very place it once came to life!  The nudity in commercial posters, on television, even on the beach, is something seen much less offensively that I think reflects much less embarrassment of the human body, a greater pride in the effects strength of humanity’s greatest vessel, the body.  This can also be seen in how people treat their bodies here (for the most part).  People seem to take better care of their bodies in Italy than America, by and large.  What between the walking and the value of restful siestas from 1-4 on weekdays instead of expecting full, nonstop workdays to produce wealth evince a greater appreciation for the body and its needs over against economic and consumer concerns.  In conjunction with this there seems to be a great deal more smoking in this society than our own, a surprising development for such a humanist society fixated with their own appearance and the  perfection thereof!  Women are scarcely seen separated from their high heels (at any time!) and men are usually (gulp) in style with collars popped!  It’s a frightening and intimidating appeal but one whose efficacy works to produce a largely humanist culture, at least within my brief four week window of observation.  

Individualism: 

There is an obvious understanding of individualism in the modern italian society, though perhaps not to the same extremity as the USA because of their mitigated capitalism in conjunction with more socialist dealings in the sense of health care.  The base ideals are still largely individualistic, people work on their own to earn money to spend and buy for themselves, to stick out from the crowd as someone unique and special.  But what about issues specific to our Renaissance studies?  Are people trained specifically for versatility and virtuosity?  It is perhaps questionable on this level because people are encouraged to study within their fields and remain within that concentration to a certain specialty in many ways in America at least, and I have seen nothing to the contrary here.  But Italians do not seem entirely concerned with becoming terribly versatile as the Renaissance individualism may necessitate.  Do people strive to be virtuous?  If we are dealing with a sort of Aristotelian understanding of virtue, that there is a certain balance achieved for every man that must be aimed for but is unique to each individual, then probably not!  Laws are established for people to pursue a blanket answer of conduct for every individual in society to conform to a set standard, not for a personalized standard for each person.  The result is not necessarily overly detrimental, because the implementation of a golden mean rule would be too unwieldy for any larger society.  So the current ethical and legal code will suffice but it does not serve to direct the community towards the virtuosity aforementioned.  In several senses then, although individualism is still a massive proponent of the Italian society, the basis in versatility and Aristotelian virtuosity seems limited at best.

Secularism: 

The rampant secularism of Europe by and large no longer seems like an entirely terrible thing to me.  For some time it has struck me as sort of malaise, a discomforting dis-caring distanced generation, deeming the church as defunct and devious. And yet, it has become something more similar to our Renaissance understanding of the term for this course.  Secularism is not so much a thing that is opposed to the church here, but really that can be more concerned with living in the here and now and being more concerned with civic life and virtue over the life of the here after.  This seems to be an accepted and even expected part of society here.  Don't get me wrong.  People here are certainly religious and adhere to Roman Catholicism strongly, but I think it is more of a societal aspect, where people don't constantly go about their daily lives being concerned with their entrance to heaven.  It may be because the average value of life is higher and people don't need to look forward so much to the next life to live joyfully.  Regardless of the justification, the secularism has huge implications for the established churches.  Attendance has been down for many religious services so that huge basilicas that I assume were once full to the brim on sundays are now reserved from the nave up and populated with a scant few attendees.  This secularism also carries with it connotations of shifting purposes for days of the week and holidays.  What was once a celebrated saint's day has often times just been down graded or renamed to a bank holiday, so that things still shut down but for more secular reasons.  Similarly corpus christi didn't phase the Italian public at all it seems!  The schedule worked on in fine order, much to my pleasure, as my travels in Positano would have suffered severely from lack of transportation!  The secularism is by no means a manifestation of the absence of Christianity though.  Quite the contrary.  Though the peoples have become more concerned with this life over the "next" there is still a huge representation for the respect and application of the ethics of Christianity.  There is still an appreciation for agape love in the Italian mindset and a certain understanding of an arrangement of an ethical code by which to conduct ones self, still loosely based on the principles of the Christian ethics.  The result leaves us with a sort of church-society conglomerate to where everyone is indeed a Roman Catholic, but not necessarily be choice but because of their Italian nationality.  Once again I am not generalizing this to everyone, but this seems to be a trend at large.  The presence of secularism is clear.

Historical self consciousness:

The church at least maintains the ancients and the newer oldies, like Saint Benedict, etcetera producing an effectual societal trend that appreciates and venerates those of the past, if not in a different way than it was once employed in education within the Renaissance.  There is a certain appreciation still largely present in a religious context for the peoples of Italy.  Saints of the centuries past show a church inclined with appreciating the past, but much less intellectually inclined but more the mythological and religious connotations they entail.  There is a certain shift therefore in what the ancients are appreciated for in education.  Whereas there is a certain understanding and dealing with the writings of more widely known philosophers, like Plato and Aristotle, much more attention is paid to religious figures in the church.  By and large there is a societal disconnect from the peoples and their ancient past, so that the average individual and even the better educated peoples are not so concerned with the ancients. But then we must really ask, are the ancients being employed like they were for the Renaissance peoples?  This new methodology of veneration over emulation has led to a developed sort of appreciation for the past but not a rebirth of the past in the present, a complication that perhaps prevents us from deeming the Renaissance as full swing as it may have once been.

This may contradict the disconnect from their past but there does exist a certain sense of Creativity and historical self consciousness in the modern Italian sentiment, from my observations.  These people are obsessed with recycling, reusing and conserving as much as possible, in a fashion that I see as unique to this generation.  The imperative seems established off of principles of planetary, green conservation.  This kind of understanding of humanity’s consumption having actual environmental consequences is a novel approach to worldview and this generation knows its Creativity when it sees it.  Thus the sort of implementation of smart cars, intensive and mandatory recycling is perhaps a manifestation of something more world changing and mind altering. So there is at least a realization and embodiment of something unique to this time period but by no means is it constricted to the same fields of artistic and philosophical expression, but perhaps this still constitutes itself as a unique act within history.

Conclusions:  What then can we say about our stated objective?  Is the Renaissance, at least according to my findings, in want of rebirth or lingering yet?  It is perhaps safest to state that it was once alive and its affects are still largely strewn through out this Italian culture.  But by no means is it still flourishing as it once was.  It can be said that the Renaissance is still a lingering entity some 500 years later, but it is by no means the most active influence over the society.  By and large the Renaissance is gone from the Italian worldview.  And now, for a departure from this dry language, I shall whet your visual appetites with a view of the Perugian sun rise.

Esse Quam Videri

North Carolina's state motto: "to be rather than to seem."  It represents some portions of Platonic ideology in the sense that the senses and "seeming" of an object could be deceptive and different from its actual form.  This then would surely be a present and powerful force in the Italian Renaissance, would it not?  The primary link to the past thoughts so heavily linked to Renaissance worldview would at least suggest so.  Yet somehow, the latter Renaissance years present a fascinating phenomenon.  In applying Aristotelian principles of observing reality and imitating reality and the Platonic appreciation for arithmetic representations, proportions, and calculations to represent the ideal form of reality, a shift occurred from just imitating reality in art and reflecting the higher forms therein, to actually creating a new reality, a new way to trick the eye.  Therefor the Renaissance peoples took a departure from "Esse quam videri" to "Videri quam esse."  The ultimate product generates an entirely different aesthetic that is entirely wonderful and pleasing, if not an utter departure from conveying the real to a conveyance of illusion.  This is perhaps my favorite product of the Renaissance and is a fantastic representation of the fundamentals of the Renaissance: humanism, in the capability of humanity to calculate and depict something that is so well crafted and carefully constructed that it supersedes reality and peoples' ability to perceive it, secularism, because the objects being depicted are not necessarily religious and usually are meant to develop an illusion focusing on this realm rather than in heaven, and even a certain historical self consciousness, in that Renaissance citizens recognize and appreciate that their Creativity is a new and distinct form of art that is shifting the nature and intent of humanity's inventiveness.  The following examples evince my point well enough.

When the architects and constructors of this church came together to create this structure there were some conflicts in interest.  The wealthy contributors to the church lived near by and wanted very much to maintain their sunny yards instead of being cast in the shade of a grandiose dome.  But the architects wanted to maintain their creative integrity and thus came to the best compromise they could.  Though this image is taken from the middle of the church floor, looking straight up at the ceiling, from specific points in the rest of the church, this appears to be a soaring dome above the church, a fantastic trick of the eye.  The intent is not so much to deceive people but to convey what they wanted to be reality.  This kind of depiction and shifting of the real to depict one's own ideal in architecture and the likes is an odd phenomenon of the mid to later Renaissance that seems a kind of departure from the traditional philosophical aims for deconstructing the constraints of this world (at least in a neoplatonists' worldview). 

Here is yet another example of the capability and calculations intentionally strewn together to play a trickery on the eye, to form a sort of deception towards a preferred reality over the actual reality.  It is solely the additional mythological figures that aid us with some hint that perhaps this painting is not the actual building itself raising higher and higher, but an elaborate hoax to goad the eye into amazement at the humanistic capability to trick the second greatest portal into the divine frenzy (the eye) into a frenzy over something entirely other than the true form.  Though it is difficult to depict without being there in person, this image evinces a portion of the illusory capabilities of interdisciplinary Renaissance artists.  Though the fresco is done at the top of the ceiling, the adornment tricks the eye into following the carefully calculated heights and proportions as something that they are no in actuality.  Don't get me wrong.  This is an impressive feat.  Yet the product serves as a fascinating and peculiar example that is less than uncommon in the later Renaissance to prove a fascination with shifting ends.  What was once done to lift up, glorify and honor the perfect unity of form and matter, now these things are brought together to rift the viewer from a higher depiction of reality into a newly constructed reality.  It is no more important to be but only to seem, and very convincingly so!

This last fresco scene depicts a group looking through a hole in the ceiling, almost as if they are enjoying looking down at us just as much, if not more, than the audience.  This follows in the same strain of depicting illusion to fool the eye.  Along with these deceiving frescoes there were also physical constructs carefully crafted to fool the eye to seeing them as much longer or grander than they actually were: 20 foot hall ways mathematically proportioned to fool the eye and brain to perceiving their distance as something closer to 60 feet!  Theatres were thrown up with proportionally deceptive hallways and backdrops so that, especially with proper illumination, the eye reads the sensory input as much more distant, grander, and altogether more impressive, especially for the backdrop of a theatrical tale!  

What's more, there are documented literary trends that follow the same preference for seeming rather than being.  "Old Nick Himself" (i.e. Machiavelli) has long been villainized for his better known work The Prince.  This text encourages following a life style that is similarly "seemly" based.  Though I agree with Machiavelli's end goals of Italian peace through unification, I do not see that his ends justify his means in the pursuit.  He encourages those in power to seem to be all human (humanism anyone?), all faithful, and many other uncomfortably omni-esque imperatives.  The intended result is to flaunt the prince's ability for governance and maintain his power over the state.  He has to seem christian and religious but actually be able to shift those leanings at any time he deems as necessary for the betterment/protection of the state.  The general trend then seems to be a movement away from ends of seeing depicting the forms (whether Aristotelean or Platonist) in either lives or art, but rather the focal point is constructing a kind of reality that can mislead its viewers.  I don't know if this development is necessarily their actual intent but it certainly seems the end result they produce.  Though, I am most impressed with this kind of art, literally and artistically speaking, because they are in many senses the basis for modern arts of these forms.  Old Nick is said to be the progenitor of modern politics and much of modern art could hardly be said to be aimed at a clearer depiction of the forms/reality (i.e. cubism, abstract art, surrealism).  Though I should probably cease my projections as of now, I know just enough on these matters to be dangerous and too little to prevent my embarrassment!

"Plato, Aristotle, how you wrestle inside me," bemoaned the Renaissance.

Ok, so perhaps bemoan is a bit of a strong word here, but the function of Aristotelian and Platonic philosophies in the Renaissance world view have proven to be necessary, though perhaps not solely sufficient.  There has been some disputation in the class as to which Neo interpretation of the philosophical ponderings is the king of the hill of the Renaissance.  Some have suggested that the big player was the neo-platonist mindset held sway, since the huge pursuit for the ideal of forms and the rise of art in their capability to raise people up to the world of forms (or at least closer thereto).  Others contend that the humanism and appreciating for the natural world in peoples like Saint Francis of Assisi  and Galileo suggest the supreme reign of the Neo-Aristotelian mindset.  I care to contend however that there did not exist any kind of monopoly in popularity for the Renaissance thinkers.  These peoples full of accepted, nay expected, anachronisms took no problem with a combination of ancient philosophies into what they saw best.  As the "School of Athens" can attest to visually, the combination of alternative time lines and peoples  evinces the mindset to be an odd sort hybrid that takes the best of several worlds and combines them with great deliberation.  Therefore there exists inherently to the Renaissance worldview a sort of interacting vibrancy played out between the Dualism of Plato and the Monism of Aristotle.  Though the "neo" tacked on to the front of these schools of thought necessarily connote a few differences in interpretation and application, the contrast exists nonetheless.
Where then do we see the Platonic mindset play itself out?  The shifting value on artists of many types is typical of the Neo-platonist approach to thought, in that painters and sculptors alike were seen on a lower level close to stone masons are manual laborers during the middle ages, their socio-economic position shifted because their highly valued skills were seen as reflections of Plato's world of forms; instead of depicting reflections of reflections, their art could somehow enhance reality and point our pour and weary souls back towards the world of forms.  In this same sense, the HUGE emphasis on mathematical calculations that Plato values is mimicked in kind in the Renaissance music and later art.  The extreme appreciation for balance in proportion for Renaissance musicians is a direct throwback to Plato.  The art we witnessed just yesterday in developing perspective and mathematically calculating the vanishing point so that all things in the painting are in proportional balance.  These thoughts are highly Platonic but by no means do they weigh out the Aristotelian approach to the world either.

As Aristotle's most famous portrait depicts, his prime locale for defining importance, function, and reality altogether is here, in this world of becoming. (Notice his hand extended out towards the earth) This is manifested heavily throughout the Renaissance worldview.  As Aristotle sees all matter is comprised of matter and form (2 of his "four causes").  This is what Renaissance artists are depicting reality of matter in their most optimal form.  In attempting to capture the world of becoming and unite it with the world of forms (i.e. the church) nature became increasingly more depicted in the church.  The church now becomes the idealized form of what nature should be like, filled with men that are no longer floating angelic beings but creatures that are gravity laden and real, and yet perfected, the best combination of matter and the form after which we should all strive.  Also entering with Aristotle's mindset is a greater appreciation for the use of observation of this world, an important aspect and perspective imitated in much of Giotto's work as well as the "School of Athens."  The importance of a systematized understanding of the world and organizing set order patterns to which everything relates in the Aristotelian mindset is even reflected in their grandiose expectation for the virtuous life lived for secular reasons, only possible through the humanist mindset.
This can hopefully evince that neither Plato or Aristotle reigned supreme in the Renaissance mindset but served as guides and grand gifters of the ways of days past; things to be conglomerated in anachronism and deliberation, more for the purpose of appreciating and incorporating all the greats of the past instead of just a singular entity.  Clearly philosophies of Plato and Aristotle have worked together through the hands of Renaissance thinkers to form a world where secularism, historical self consciousness, humanism, and individualism are possible.

Like a Phoenix from out of the Ash (and mud)

What a fantastical weekend.  Honestly it was better than my highest expectations on so many facets.  Even though the hostel was a party hostel I was able to sleep really well (to the bumping base just outside my window) and the last minute change from Capri to Positano was a welcomed relief to my eyes as well as my wallet!  The phenomenal nature of Positano must be revisited, but perhaps at a later post.  What truly warrants mention is my most fortuitous visit to Pompei (scavi), Ercolano (scavi), and the National Museum of Archaeology in Naples.  These visits evinced a kind of alarming realization for me.  Up until this point I had only been giften with visiting the Renaissance statues, paintings, and frescoes without much ability to compare them to their base.  All of these mediums were employed and started because of the ancient Grecian and Roman art that displayed so many of the central concepts adopted by the Renaissance society: humanism, ideal-form, proportional distance, mathematically inclined songs, deep philosophical meaning, grandiose architecture and the likes.  The well preserved sites of pompeii and Herculaneum each boasted a proud resemblance to the Renaissance fundamentals (or should I say the Renaissance resembles the excavation sites due to their temporal proximities).  Check out this statues that was left in Herculaneum after it was crushed under mudslide caused after the eruption of Mount Vesuvius:

Now pardon me for extrapolating, but the similarities in stance to many of the items we have seen in Firenze and Roma alike are so stark that one cannot help but recognize it:

This and countless other examples were displayed from the time period near the 79 CE eruption of Mount Vesuvius.  Mostly from the 2nd and 3rd century CE, these works displayed almost the exact same contra-posta stance that many of the Renaissance crafters found so enthralling in their sculpture works; all the way from Michalangello to Bernini, the ideal forms and mathematical calculations common to the ancients is present throughout the Renaissance work.  Pardon me for the picture overload but here is a room full of examples:

These examples of balance, of sculptures in action now no longer scream solely Renaissance to me, but also the ancient Grecian and Roman principles of sculpting that were so crucial to their art.  It was finally realized in my mind what exactly was being reborn!

Another crucial aspect to the Renaissance art is the fresco tradition.  I don't know that it is necessary to include all representations of this fresco process but here is one to tantalize all your fancies (plus I'm all about superfluity)

And though this possesses an admittedly greater amount of Christian overtones, the similarities in balance, human portrayal, and a reflection of reality is a significant reflection to the Herulaneum (especially well preserved) frescoes seen both in the excavation site itself and in the National Archaeological Museum:

Pardon the nudity but this is ancient European Art and it has been a great challenge to spare you the amount of nudity I have managed thus far.  The depictions in both the frescoes portray something very close to reality, or at least ideal reality.  The beauty, the elegance, the age!  I am in amazement.  But to see and connect the very art that inspired the Renaissance truly brought to life the rebirth that took place between 1350 and 1600 in Italy.  The mosaics in the Renaissance also bear extreme similarities to those preserved in Herculaneum, and what is most noteworthy is the actual feel for reality those mosaics portray.  At the end of it all though, what made me so ecstatic was seeing the great battle of Alexander (the Great).  This fantastically old item, so amazing, will never cease to amaze me.  I shall leave you with it:

This mosaic is from pompeii and looks just like a painting!  I was close enough to touch it but would never dare!  Ha!  It reminds me of the battle of Constantine picture that I referenced earlier.  Not that I am entirely concerned relating all things between Renaissance and the ancients but making connections is just like Pringles.  Once you pop the top, the fun don't stop.

Well This is Just Awesome

For all you inquiring baby birds out there, don't worry, momma Matthew's going to feed your intellectual hunger!  This trip to Sorrento is going quite swimmingly!  We made it here in record time.  Had a liesurely meal in Napoli (I ate pizza in the birth place of Pizza!!!!!) and even went to the Acheaological Museum of Naples.  The mosaics, sculptures, bronze casts, and everything was phenomenal!  Tonight and tomorrow we reside in "seven hostel" which, among other things, is only a five minute walk from the beach, has happy hour from 6:30-8 with awesome drinks (only from what I've heard mum, I promise), hot roomies in the dorm with me (mixed gender, I assure you), free breakfast in the mornings (superfluous parentheses), and...brace yourself...AIR CONDITIONED ROOMS!  Oh my, I've died and gone to heaven!  Well, it's off to the beach now, pompeii, Herculaneum, and Vseuvius tomorrow, and Capri the day after.  Ciao ciao!  Buon weekend!

The Grecian gods, the Christian God(s?), and David

By no means to I mean to offend any of my Roman Catholic brethren and sisters.  I am fully aware that Firenze was under papal influence and I do not intend at ALL to insinuate these peoples as beyond Christianity, polytheists, or pagans.  That being said, I've seen too many Davids in Firenze to not catch on to the trend.  The Greeks often times would claim a patron god in attempts to claim protection from all sorts of offenses, both natural and human caused disasters.  This kind of act has had an ebb and flow of devotion throughout the years but it has never become truly as potent nor realized to me until my interaction with it in Firenze.  Here is a replica of the most famous David statue, Michelangelo's very Grecian nude.

As one can likely surmise, the figure stood at about the proportion of three and a half regular Firenzians' heights.   This depiction of the King of the Jews, David, is a man uncircumcised, standing at some 17 + feet high!  Perhaps somewhat austere in his garb (clutching solely his sling) this view of David has a man whose hands and feet by far out-proportion the other components of his body.  This exists in good accord with many of the Renaissance sculptures we found in Firenze.  Large appendages seem to be common in the study of producing a figure who will appear in proportion from a distance.  This is a clear portrayal of the science of art and perspective so common to the Renaissance hard at work.  Though the perfection and intentional appearance of the rest of the sculpture perhaps lends credence to the thought that the enlarged hands and feet serve as expressions of the humanist tendencies of the Renaissance thinkers.  Perhaps the enlarged hands portray a belief in the capability of humanity to reach the status of godhood?  Whatever the reason, it seems far from a mistake rather an intentional product of the sculptor. It makes the original all the more impressive to recognize that its source was a flawed piece of granite!  A daunting product indeed when we recognize the flawed source could have led to a much more difficult construction of the statue; destruction of the entire piece hinged upon the false movement and incorrect placement of but one chisel.

We see too that the godlike status that the patron representative (god) of Firenze has adopted a bit of variance in expression, though scarcely departing from the Renaissance background.  David is seen as a prime example of the capability of humanity to reach near divine status, to be a man after the heart of God, to unite the 12 discordant tribes of Israel, to reign forever strong in guiding the kingdom of Israel: this is the man in the bible chosen to represent Firenze, the center of the Renaissance.  Their protection of the love of God, their belief in human capability, and their affluence all lead to close appreciation and affiliation with the figure that David is.  Perhaps this could be seen as less secular, since this is a biblical figure, but this trend might be an embodiment of that very secularism!  This is a David oft removed from his background story.  This David is a character of strength, of potency, meant not so much as a reminder of the church but a reminder of the potency of the city of Firenze.  He then embodies civic pride and connects a different kind of historical self consciousness for the Florentine public.  "We are living out the Golden Age of Israel here in Firenze in this time," the David(s) scream.  This kind of connection with and appreciation for a more historical David over the theological David also lends itself to reclaiming portions of history and having a deep appreciation for the past.  Because this and so many other Davids found themselves established apart from the church, it is all the more convincing of their secularism.

The other Davids, though perhaps not as tall and intimidating as Michelangelo's David (and the Grecian god statues it reminds me of) still contain rich symbolism that lean towards a Renaissance mindset.  Even if cast in bronze (confusingly more expensive and "valuable" than the marble carvings!) the boyish long haired David of Donatello is a depiction of class, strength and power.  The small boy steps his foot triumphantly upon the head of the slain Goliath after all!  This boy, sporting the hat more common to Renaissance Firenze than the time of the Ancient Israelites suggests a kind of anachronistic and well intended historical reclamation of the Davidic figure.  Perhaps in the same vein, I distinctly recall one marble David depicted with both his pointer and index finger extended from both hands.  This might not seem too odd, till we recognize that this statue was commissioned by one of the main powers of Florence, a bishop!  As such, the David's depiction betrays perhaps some kind of Christian claim on the Davidic figure; mayhaps even in attempts to contest the secular claims to the figure.  It could even be an implied blessing on the city of Frienze, since this is often the hand symbol given when priests bless.

The true nature of the David-craze of Renaissance Florence will perhaps elude us for some time.  David is something of a symbol for the city, though one wonders how much David began to embody the protectorate role for the city in a similar fashion to the Greeks who proceeded them.  Was David the embodiment of humanism in Florence or something more?  Perhaps an imitation enacted in the same fashion that the oh-so admired Greeks so often did with Athena in Athens?  We may never know but it is worth some consideration.

That Infernal Dante

There is something remarkable about the transitional figures of the Renaissance.  Those peoples who evince characteristics of an age not their own, Dante, Francis,Giotto, and so on, seem to profess a kind of unexpected potency on their surroundings.  Their works, sculptures, art, texts, and theological contemplations exhibit many of the new and innovative characteristics later destined to become commonplace in the years to follow for the Renaissance.  Dante Alighieri portrays many of the attributes that we see common to the Renaissance period, including, but not limited to, an historical self consciousness, secularism, humanism, a utilization of tempered rationalism, and a revitalization and appreciation of the ancients.  Though we have but a few short excerpts from the beginning book of the Comedia, the Inferno, there are clear (and perhaps deliberately so) selections that evince a strong historical awareness of important individuals.  Not the least of which serves as Dante's guide through Hell, the great Greek poet who serves Dante in the underworld in a sense that ingeniously establishes a stark link between Dante's present and the Grecian past; a recurrent theme in Renaissance world.  It is also striking how the greats of the past end up: in a sort of Limbo location, these are the peoples of the past who worked up great deals of merit and merely made the mistake of being born prior to the capability of being baptized in the name of Christ.  Included amongst this group is Aristotle, Plato, Julius Caesar, a throng of grand poets (who "rightfully" welcome Dante as one of their own), and a host of other ancients, each equally unChristian as the last.  It makes sense that none of them are in heaven from a Christian perspective, though it perhaps betrays Dante's growing secular ideology in that he does not punish these non-believers in the pits of hell, but merely dooms them to the existence of perpetually wanting more.  His secularism begins to seethe through a bit more when we are confronted with decidedly Christian figures meeting sorts of punishment in the pits of the inferno, i.e. prior popes who did not act justly according to their authority.  This kind of shocking statement begins to evince Dante's transitional role as an entry way towards the Renaissance.  (here's a Florentine depiction of Dante to whet your appetite and perhaps dampen the dryness of my work a bit)
It is also worthy of mention that Dante's Inferno portrays a good deal of Creativity and Historical Self Consciousness.  Dante nearly realized the Italian language in opting to limn the works of Comedia in the accent of Latin (Italian that is) that was but a common language of the people.  This opened the door for centuries of authors and thinkers thereafter to release works in native vernacular, circumventing the issue of exclusion that came about through the sole utilization of Latin.  This may even connect to humanism because these people have entirely evaded hellish punishment via their own works, not through the action of God in/through Jesus!  This kind of thinking also evinces a certain action in the peoples in relation to other people instead of a central theme following peoples' relation to the church.  This reflects even further suggestions of secularism over the utterly divine centric mindset of the Middle Ages.  The clear reflection of soft rationalism is displayed in the sort of Aristotelean feel of the punishment each individual garners in the pits of the inferno.  Because people disrespected or ignored their own sense of rationalism, because those suffering therein were receiving torture reflecting or directly opposite to the lack of rational life they employed.  This process produces something interesting: Dante serves as a model for the Italian Renaissance in many ways, a kind of mold that is broken for him is imitated and (perhaps) improved upon in several castings for other important Renaissance figures.  The ensuing Renaissance will have been forever changed at the hands of yet another citizen of Firenze.

Vesuvius and all the Jazz

I really need to get this off my chest.  I am going to the Amalfi Coast this weekend and am elated to some nth degree.  I get to see Sorrento, a top notch archaeological museum in Napoli, Pompeii, Herculaneum, Mount Vesuvius, and Capri!  Ah!  I can barely contain my jubilation.  I am also kind of scared, but here's to hoping it rocks.  I really want to listen to Sufjan Stevens' song, "Vesuvius" while I hike it from this album.  I hope it works out because that would be dang awesome!!  Well here's to hoping for an awesome time.  I hope things are going quite swimmingly across the pond.  I've had my ups and downs but it seems to be going alright as of now.  My Italian midterm is behind me and it's nothing but travels on my own for the next couple of days.  The lone wolf out on his own!  Which reminds me distinctly of one of my favorite new italian sayings.  When one prepares for a large examination one exclaims: "In bocca lupa" (meaning in the mouth of the wolf)  People respond "Crepi" which means it died!  How great!  The following photograph is the beginning of a fantastic meal I had just after a fantastic service at Santa Croce  Enjoy and   Buon weekend!

The Papal Basilica of Assisi

There is a phenomenal growth of artistic and conceptual appreciation evinced in the artistic representations present in the Basilica constructed on behalf of the revolutionary Saint Francis of Assisi (San Francesco di Assisi).  The true significance of this growth is immeasurable.  The record present in this basilica is much akin to the fossil records present in the grand canyon; almost as if you can see the ancient Cambrian period-esque under belly of the church with their sparse and un-lively fossils contrasted against the grandiosity of the Jurassic period with its huge, life like fossils.  It is truly fascinating to see how the effects of the humanism and love of people spread and affected the intellectual class as it spilled from the lips of pre-Renaissance sage, San Francesco.  His revolutionary understanding of the creation story from Genesis has an opposite effect to what many conservatives fear theories of evolution perpetrates.  Whereas evolution based world views are often opposed for their capability to lower the view of humanity down to the lowly state of just another version of an animal, Saint Francis saw a familial connection between all of creation in a way that led to birds, water, moon, and sun all to be seen as his brothers and sisters.  Therefor Francis elevated all of creation up to the level of humanity.  What are the consequences of such thoughts?  War, hatred, violence, against humanity and creation are nearly entirely removed from society as necessities, for who wars against members of the same family?!  This sort of infectious humanism served as a gateway for many early Renaissance thinkers to slip into our world of Rebirth without running contrary to the church.  It may in fact be due to the humanist and nature loving thoughts of Francis that so many artists were able to shake the Eastern Orthodox-esque limitations on the depiction of reality in art.  "Only pagans depict reality.  We are Christians and therefore must not artistically depict reality!  We can only depict saints the highest subject matter of theology" soon became "God has created all of the world in beauty and all of it pertains to God since they are all our brothers!"  Just as Saint Francis brought Jesus once more out of the church and to the people, his thoughts made it possible once more for the outside world, sister nature in all her grandeur, to once more fill the church.  And what a church it is!  In the photograph it is in the upper middlin section peaking out from amongst the buildings of Assisi.

What did Francis' thoughts, his humanistic tendencies make possible?  In contrasting the lower church depictions of Francis' life with the upper church here in Assisi, we can see (si, ha I love word play) a fantastic contrast.  In just a few short decades (about 35 years) Giotto's depictions of Francis' life are completely altered, carrying the feel and tendencies for perspective, reality, and distance that suggest some kind of appreciation for the education of the past, a sort of Grecian/Roman appreciation for reality's depiction in art.  One is reminded of the papal-death bed vision of Assisi in contrast between above and below.  The under-church's image while beautiful and divine in its own sense conveys a kind of brown blob for a bed, with a man that may be laying down or sitting up, but is entirely 2d, without and kind of potent depiction of reality.  yet Giotto's work above shows a very real bed, with a mattress and INCREDIBLE detail.  It jumps off the wall and into your eyes; no longer a simple sticker on the wall!  

Likewise the under-church conveys imagery of Saint Francis ripping his clothes off in the street, giving his father his clothes back while the bishop covers his naked body.  But his naked feet bear no toes!  His ribs are absent and one can scarcely decipher where the cartoon ends and the religious paraphernalia begins!  yet it's upper-church counter part depicts a man with toes, ribs displayed, and a sort of shocking realism.  This painting of Giotto's proves so inspirational that the form of the infuriated father lunging to strike is imitated for years to come, even on the fountain in the Perugia square!  What then can we say about the incredible acts of Saint Francis that is a hyperbole?  This single man, the gateway to the Renaissance, a man ahead of his times, the Jesus after Jesus, the first possessor of the stigmata, the inspiration of an order, the husband of Lady poverty, the brother to all creation, the Saint that saved the Catholic Church.  It sounds as if we are in dire need of another Saint Francis even today.

Angelic Decline or Rise of Humanism?

I noticed a curious occurrence taking place in the plethora of artistic developments we witnessed in Firenze. As time progressed out of the middle ages, Icons and pictures of religious figures become less concerned with portraying ethereal and almost cartoonish representations of saints.  This is replaced with an attempt and often times dead-on conveyance of reality.  So where robes were once in one flowing sheet on the body without an obvious curvature, they obey the laws of gravity!  They have weight and  the form of the figure underneath can be seen through the movement and shape of the clothing!  In attempts to interpret the implications of this tendency, I am reminded of the rise of humanism and secularism in the Renaissance.  No longer is the saint portrayed in a way that focuses solely on his/her heavenly role but also recognizes the importance and implications of that person's life here on earth as an end in itself.  As their robes begin to fall towards the earth, so too the thoughts of their painters in a growing secularism.  This is not to say though that there is a lack of appreciation for the matters both heavenly and ecclesiastical; the themes for much of the artwork under consideration were still of Biblical figures and religious devotees.  

As such, the transition from an emphasis of the divine focused on in the Middle Ages towards the secularist leanings of the Renaissance can be seen in the records of halos and how they were sported by the saints.  Coming into the fifteenth century, the majority of the work I have witnessed bears a more ethereal feel, harkening to Greek Orthodox iconography in a sense that doesn't concern itself with actual spacing of individuals in artistry.  In the same sense of the weightlessness and spatial ignore-ance (not meant to be an insult but an observation of how they were ignored), these earlier paintings bear this likeness:

Notice the image in the middle.  I apologize for the glare, but the halos are nearly as solid, if not more, than the surroundings.  The halos end up conveying the same amount of weight as the bodies and heads they adorn.  As our guide termed it, they're like golden dining plates behind their heads."  This portrayal of halos starts transitioning in conjunction with a series of corresponding historical occurrences.  Near the mid point of the 15th century, there was an ecumenical council between the Roman Catholic powers and the Eastern Orthodox figure heads.  This council failed to bring much resolution.  In corresponding time the Muslims were finally overtaking the capital of the Eastern Orthodox world, Constantinople.  The result shows a back-tracking in the christian West from the traditional conveyance of halos as bearing similarities to those in the Eastern Orthodox church.  In conjunction with the somewhat sour council and the invasion of the Turks, the portrayal of saints in Italy visibly began to change.  As their clothes began showing a dependance on gravity, as spatial placement and proportions were once more restored in importance for the artists of the Italian Renaissance, so too the halos began to lose their golden solidity.  Witness, for instance, the comparison between the prior halos as thick gold dinner plates and the following halo of the upside-down crucified Peter:

It is logically fallacious to draw necessary lines of causality in this relationship, but the correspondence of the rise of humanism and the departure and diminishment of halo-employment is yet worthy of note.  Perhaps we see a shift in the artistic understanding of the roles of these biblical figures?  Perhaps the thin rim barely perceivable upon the dome of (it's still hard to call him this after my Baptist upbringing: saint) Peter, according to my interpretation, conveys a better understanding of the earthly, secular role of Peter.  The other components of this amazing, fire-resistant fresco show the earthbound figure of Peter in many of the acts of Miracles that took place throughout his life after the ascension of heaven.  This Saint Peter is seen as a much heavier, earthly, secular-ly figure.  The robes draped over his body evince a character fully secular and a part of the earth, leading a life of virtue and purity supreme enough to raise the dead and give the lame the gift of mobility once more through the simple passage of his shadow!  It seems then that the rise of emphasis of secularism (i.e. virtue for the sake of virtuous living on this earth as opposed to living for access to heaven) and the capabilities for humanity to and be good here on this earth, i.e. humanism, are expressed in the translation of dinner-plate halos to the thin barely-seen halos present in these frescos and many others like it of the later of the fifteenth and early sixteenth century.  

It is significant to recognize that this transition was not instantaneous but a gradual shift, a slow shift from plate halos to thin rims on the head.  Perhaps the ultimate portrayal of this can be seen in Leonardo Da Vinci's works, of which very few if not one sole portrayal bears a halo on any saintly figure.  Sadly the majority of the locales in Firenze barred us from photography but the picture is so clear in my mind, it's unshakeable.  A very European Mary reads a book in a garden as the arch angel Michael pays her a visit (perhaps correlating to an annunciation?).  The truly interesting peace is that this bears one of the few halos Leonardo ever crafted.  Even in this light, the thin golden bar girding their domes are nothing like their plate-y, physical predecessors.  Moreover, this halo was the product of a very young and forced Leonardo, but it was not long after that he held true to his own artistic and theological cogitations.  This is perhaps the first and last painting he crafted with any halo involved.  A noteworthy bit indeed in a Renaissance world of rising secularism and humanism.

Tori di Constantine

This is the arch of Constantine near the Roman forum and the Flavian Amphitheater.  Thought you guys might like to see me with a smile.  Teehee.  Pardon the interruption of scholasticism.

Prognostication on Firenze

Somewhere in between the English and Italian languages, i's often shift over to l's.  It's been a humorous observation to take place our plazas translate to piazza for Italians, as well as our Florence equating their Firenze.  How great!  In attempts to project my expectations for the Florence trip I shall employ the aptly assigned materials on Giotto and Brunelleschi, the Renaissance men who truly formed and reformed the heart of the rebirth present in the Renaissance.  In the sense of the growing understanding of the Neoplatonists, their work of art was one of the most divine frenzy, representing a most fantastical understanding of the higher forms that art not only becomes but represents.  I am most elated to witness the arts these men have produced that have become so crucial to the interworking of the city of Florence for centuries.  This focuses most fittingly around the church most popularly referred to as Duomo.  This basilica is the birth place of much of the trouble in Brunelleschi's life.  Having to contend with Lorenzo to cast in bronze the doors of the baptistry, Brunelleschi lost the competition in creating the most beautiful door, or rather tied with his main contender.  Though this seemed as a loss in his eyes, which historically seems to have been for the better.  As a result, Brunelleschi ventured to the Pantheon and other famous Roman structures yet extant in the city of Rome to learn their architecture and style.  This is what Brunelleschi offered to the Renaissance: a rebirth for the appreciation and application of Roman architecture.  The product made possible was the once thought impossible establishment of the dome on the Basilica that remained uncovered for 80 years: the Duomo.  Using an ingenious mixture of Roman and Gothic architecture, Brunelleschi was able to achieve what many before him for nearly a century couldn't.  Sadly, his newly learned Roman style architecture could not alone solve the problems posed by the necessities of the 180 foot tall towering structure that the Basilica was without the dome!  Though he dare not fully cede to the demands for the Gothic style herein, he had to employ some of the techniques for success, though he was able to tickle most of his fancy by employing a sort of dual layered design to establish a successful topping.  The result?  Something scarcely seen before.  Something I can't wait to witness!  A combination of art, architecture, mathematics, classical appreciation I can hardly imagine to contest it!  And yet, there it is, a testament to the capabilities of Creativity and the true skill of the Renaissance man.  Herein lies a clear connection to the kind of scholastic endeavors present in much of Renaissance education--a clear connection to the education of the past.  This is a different employment than I am used to, because its medium is not conveyed through text but rather in the sprawling edifices of Italia.  Perhaps in absentia from Brunelleschi's work here is the component of secularism; let's face it, all his main works are done for churches.  But does he look at it in the same sense that we think of churches?  In his ten volume work on buildings, Brunelleschi refers to churches as temples intended for worshiping the gods.  His intent is clearly in reference to worshipping God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit along with the saints but I think there is something being conveyed here that is different than my own more protestant and less Renaissanc-ian thinking on the role of the church.  I cogitate often on the purpose of beautiful architecture and the grandiose nature of some cathedrals and usually chalk up to an honor towards God.  But there seems to be a different kind of inspiration looped up in this Renaissance thought process, if I may be so bold as to insert my own uneducated opinion.  This is a manifestation of a sort of secularist and humanist appreciation for the products of humanity and its capability to achieve the impossible: as in capping the 8 decade-roofless basilica.  This is what I am most elated to witness!  The manifestation of where Roman meets Gothic architecture, where secularism meets the church, where old meets new in rebirth, where art meets math, where I can limp around the streets of Firenze!  In combination with anticipation for Brunelleschi's midwifing in the process of rebirthing Roman architecture, Giotto's astounding rediscovery of the process of proportion and the calculation of distances in painting, sculpting and bronze casting is nothing short of miraculous.  It brings to mind a comparison to Plato's departure from the world of forms and contemplation for the re-cognizing of the forms-especially those of good art!  Giotto's crafty fingerprints will be all over the city in a way that can scarcely be missed.  His reawakening of proportion and detail shows a sort of chronological awareness and Renaissanc-ian appreciation for the education and methodology employed in the past.  Certainly the great influences of Brunelleschi and Giotto will bear heavy weight in my appreciation and cogitations in the city of Firenze.

Arte a Roma di Michalangelo

Alright, now that I've gotten that butchering of a foreign language out of the way, along with a hectic weekend to the capital of Italy in which I was late to nearly every group meeting (much to my dismay, chagrin, and down right self-loathing for), I experienced centuries, perhaps even millennia of art work!  We're talking everything from the Roman Forum to Basilica di San Pietro.  I saw the flavian amphitheater!  I saw a parade of sculptures, frescoes, 3d-like artwork, and the beauty of the Sistine chapel great enough to illicit tears from Whitney.  What do I do with all of this?  Out of all these options which could plausibly be selected as most preferable, most exemplary, most favored among the Renaissanc-ers?  All superlatives and fictitious words aside, I turn to Michael Angelo's depiction of Constantine's war in which he invokes the name of Christ and victoriously alters the face of Christianity for ever more: taking what was once peaceful for war, what was once for the outcast for the mainstream, what was once opposed to much of the Roman Empire for another piece of architectural underpinning to be subsumed by the non-stop automaton of the Roman civilization.  Judgment's over!  Thanks for allowing me a Protestant aside.  Check the painting out!  Pretty beautiful right, at least if we ignore the extreme examples of violence portrayed therein.  My picture can do no justice to the form of this art!  It's but a mere imitation of a gloriously done imitation.  To truly appreciate this you would need to visit Musei Vaticani or at least borrow a book from me on the place!  But please, tickle my fancy.  Just ride with me on my shoddy attempt at deciphering just what the artist intended with the original.  We see the clear focus on the ideal form of what humanity should be, each muscle strengthened, proportioned, balanced, and aesthetically pleasing.  If you can notice, the water here is not even splashing around the people as they fall, slain in battle.  Is this a lack of focus on detail or more a focus on the human beings of the picture?  I like to believe that it is simply focusing heavily on the peoples as opposed the background surroundings.

As a quick side note:  The balance in this piece is clever in recognition of the split between the sky and the ground and the battle scene in contrast to the body of water in the left corner creates an off center, yet oddly balanced piece.  I also assume the man in shining gold armor to which most items point towards is Constantine himself and perhaps the angels above him, though even they point down back towards Constantine's advance.  This certainly may be my own assumption but the armor that these people have donned looks a little more recent than the armor I would expect to see in the fourth century CE when the battle took place.  There's also a pretty stark absence of Imperial Roman paraphernalia, which might be a sort of reclaiming the historical item and renaming it utterly in Christian will as opposed to its probable basis in somewhat muddled mixtures between Roman interests and Christian ideals.  It is also fascinating to me that Constantine himself does not have blood on him or his weaponry as far as I can tell.  This may entail a certain amount of virtue associated with him, if I am not reading into this too much, in that he is not blood thirsty but also not afraid of battle.  This kind of reaches back to some of the Aristotelean ideas of virtue in attempting not so much to produce a kind of fool hardy-cocky at one extreme or an inferior cowardice, but the Aristotelean approach boasts a kind of balance between the two that Constantine seems to be boasting (a sort of anachronistic combination I imagine would be heavily shot down in modern society's understanding of proper order).  This is very common in the Renaissance works we have thus far observed.  The kind of focus that is present here just screams Renaissance in so many ways it's truly hard to miss.