User:Jessicanjuarez/Divine Love Conquering Earthly Love (Baglione): Difference between revisions
Rmmiller364 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Rmmiller364 (talk | contribs) m minor copyediting |
||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
== Description == |
== Description == |
||
The painting, according to the Web Gallery of Art, depicts [[Eros]], the god of love and desire, as an armor-clad angel, as he draws back with his arms, aiming for a final thrust to kill the figure in the bottom right whom Web Gallery also stated to be Cupid.<ref name=":1" /> The figure underneath Eros, is a provocatively naked beautiful young boy, in a humanly form, laying defenseless on the ground, according to Google Arts & Culture. Baglione gave this figure religious features, and it was a challenge to Baglione’s contemporary moral values.<ref name=":0" /> |
|||
Then in the background at the bottom left, there is a devil with faun ears, holding a trident as it crouches down with an anguished and surprise look as it turns to the viewer.<ref name=":0" /> |
Then in the background at the bottom left, there is a devil with faun ears, holding a trident as it crouches down with an anguished and surprise look as it turns to the viewer.<ref name=":0" /> |
||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
This piece is a depiction of a battle between Eros and [[Anteros]], trying to win over the soul of a man. However, if the two individuals resolved their complication, then they would be achieving the perfect love.<ref name=":0" /> |
This piece is a depiction of a battle between Eros and [[Anteros]], trying to win over the soul of a man. However, if the two individuals resolved their complication, then they would be achieving the perfect love.<ref name=":0" /> |
||
Baglione used elements of Caravaggio’s style, so he wanted make the hue dark by using an intense and direct spotlight in order to create a strong chiaroscuro contrast between the background and the figures in the foregrounds. Similarly, to Caravaggio’s, Love Victorious, the figures are close together in the plane, with the raking light covering only Eros and [[Cupid]] as the foreground. Along with this, Baglione was also able to demonstrate naturalism, or the new vision of Caravaggio. However, Baglione does not fully adopt Caravaggio’s technique, and still maintains his traditional approach, Mannerism, which is utilized on the individual figures. <ref name=":1" /> |
|||
== First Version == |
== First Version == |
||
[[File:Giovanni Baglione - Heavenly Love and Earthly Love - WGA1158.jpg|thumb|First verison of Divine Love Conquering Earthly Love, 1602]] |
[[File:Giovanni Baglione - Heavenly Love and Earthly Love - WGA1158.jpg|thumb|First verison of Divine Love Conquering Earthly Love, 1602]] |
||
The first version of the painting is called Divine Love Overcoming Profane Love and was painted in the year 1602. The painting is held in the German art museum, Gemäldegalerie, in [[Berlin]].<ref name=":0" /> It is unknown why Baglione painted two versions of this painting; |
The first version of the painting is called ''Divine Love Overcoming Profane Love'' and was painted in the year 1602. The painting is held in the German art museum, Gemäldegalerie, in [[Berlin]].<ref name=":0" /> It is unknown why Baglione painted two versions of this painting; the first version was painted for for Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani. There are slight alterations that can be seen when compared to the second version. |
||
In the first version, Eros is wearing a completely different and less decorated armor. The devil in the bottom left corner is not facing forward |
In the first version, Eros is wearing a completely different and less decorated armor. The devil in the bottom left corner is not facing forward; instead the creature is hidden behind Eros. A last feature that can be seen is in the hand positions of both Eros and the human figure of the bottom right corner. Eros's raised right arm is facing outward in its attacking position, while the human figure in the bottom has a slight shift in his right raised hand as well. |
||
== Second Version == |
== Second Version == |
||
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
== History == |
== History == |
||
[[File:Amor Vincit Omnia-Caravaggio (c.1602).jpg|thumb|Amor Vincit Omnia (Love Victorious) - Caravaggio, 1602]] |
[[File:Amor Vincit Omnia-Caravaggio (c.1602).jpg|thumb|Amor Vincit Omnia (Love Victorious) - Caravaggio, 1602]] |
||
Since Baglione had been trained by Francesco Morelli, a [[Tuscany|Tuscan]] artist, most of artwork was a resemblance to Morelli’s style. However, in approximately in the beginning of the 1600, Baglione was introduced to Caravaggio’s style, and like many other artists at the time, he admired the artist’s work, thus participating |
Since Baglione had been trained by Francesco Morelli, a [[Tuscany|Tuscan]] artist, most of artwork was a resemblance to Morelli’s style. However, in approximately in the beginning of the 1600, Baglione was introduced to Caravaggio’s style, and like many other artists at the time, he admired the artist’s work, thus participating in the [[Caravaggesque]] style, where he started using elements of Caravaggio’s work. This includes ''Divine Love Conquering Earthly Love'', which Baglione had created at the time as competition against Caravaggio’s work ''Love Victorious''. Baglione incorporated some elements of Caravaggio’s into his work in order to surpass him. However, this displeased Caravaggio and resulted in Caravaggio slandering Baglione’s work.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last=Zirpolo |first=Lilian H. |date=2003 |title=Review of Giovanni Baglione: Artistic Reputation in Baroque Rome |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/20061684 |journal=The Sixteenth Century Journal |volume=34 |issue=4 |pages=1165–1167 |doi=10.2307/20061684 |issn=0361-0160}}</ref> |
||
Caravaggio made this statement against Baglione’s work including ''Divine Love'': |
Caravaggio made this statement against Baglione’s work including ''Divine Love'': |
||
| Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
''And your painting deserves only vituperation.” <ref>{{Cite book |last=Graham-Dixon |first=Andrew |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rFIV_tYYld0C&q=Baglione#v=snippet&q=Baglione&f=false |title=Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane |date=2011-11-10 |publisher=W. W. Norton & Company |isbn=978-0-393-08293-7 |language=en}}</ref>'' |
''And your painting deserves only vituperation.” <ref>{{Cite book |last=Graham-Dixon |first=Andrew |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rFIV_tYYld0C&q=Baglione#v=snippet&q=Baglione&f=false |title=Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane |date=2011-11-10 |publisher=W. W. Norton & Company |isbn=978-0-393-08293-7 |language=en}}</ref>'' |
||
After Baglione had unveiled his altarpiece for the church of the [[Church of the Gesù| |
After Baglione had unveiled his ''Resurrection'' altarpiece for the church of the [[Church of the Gesù|Gesù]] in 1603, word started circulating in Rome that Caravaggio and his cronies, Orazio Longhi, Filippo Trisegni, and [[Orazio Gentileschi]], who were disparaging Baglione’s artistic abilities. |
||
These insults lead into a libel lawsuit in the same year, 1603. During the trial, Caravaggio claimed, "I don't know any painter who thinks Giovanni Baglione is a good painter."<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last=Ostrow |first=Steven F. |date=2003 |title=Review of Giovanni Baglione: Artistic Reputation in Baroque Rome |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3177390 |journal=The Art Bulletin |volume=85 |issue=3 |pages=608–611 |doi=10.2307/3177390 |issn=0004-3079}}</ref> For centuries, this exact claim tainted Baglione’s reputation and the way his artwork was judged.<ref name=":2" /> |
These insults lead into a libel lawsuit in the same year, 1603. During the trial, Caravaggio claimed, "I don't know any painter who thinks Giovanni Baglione is a good painter."<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last=Ostrow |first=Steven F. |date=2003 |title=Review of Giovanni Baglione: Artistic Reputation in Baroque Rome |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3177390 |journal=The Art Bulletin |volume=85 |issue=3 |pages=608–611 |doi=10.2307/3177390 |issn=0004-3079}}</ref> For centuries, this exact claim tainted Baglione’s reputation and the way his artwork was judged.<ref name=":2" /> |
||
| Line 78: | Line 78: | ||
Baglione stated that the attackers were only insulting him because they were jealous that he had been the one to receive the commission. More generally because his works were much better than Caravaggio’s by stating that the works were, "held in higher esteem than theirs.” During the trial, when Caravaggio was being interrogated, scholars claim that he still proceeded to add to the insults.<ref name=":2" /> Smith O’Neil claims that that with this trial, what Baglione was demonstrating is a vendetta towards Caravaggio and to also prove his [[virtù]].<ref name=":3" /> |
Baglione stated that the attackers were only insulting him because they were jealous that he had been the one to receive the commission. More generally because his works were much better than Caravaggio’s by stating that the works were, "held in higher esteem than theirs.” During the trial, when Caravaggio was being interrogated, scholars claim that he still proceeded to add to the insults.<ref name=":2" /> Smith O’Neil claims that that with this trial, what Baglione was demonstrating is a vendetta towards Caravaggio and to also prove his [[virtù]].<ref name=":3" /> |
||
Towards the end of 1604, the trial had already ended and Baglione’s Caravaggesque era |
Towards the end of 1604, the trial had already ended and Baglione’s Caravaggesque era as well. |
||
== Symbolism == |
== Symbolism == |
||
According to the Psychomachia of Prudentius, it is stated that the painting is a moralizing theme of combat between the vices and the virtues. Petrarch codified that since the devil is a portrait of Caravaggio, that this piece is a satirical punishment to both Caravaggio’s art as well as his moral scruples; it is also a visual representation of sodomy.<ref name=":1" /> |
According to the Psychomachia of Prudentius, it is stated that the painting is a moralizing theme of combat between the vices and the virtues. Petrarch codified that since the devil is a portrait of Caravaggio, that this piece is a satirical punishment to both Caravaggio’s art as well as his moral scruples; it is also a visual representation of sodomy.<ref name=":1" /> |
||
Another claim that scholars make when identifying the content, is that the figure in the armor is a depiction of Eros, who is suspected to be representing Divine Love, in which |
Another claim that scholars make when identifying the content, is that the figure in the armor is a depiction of Eros, who is suspected to be representing Divine Love, in which he interrupts a tryst between Cupid, in the bottom right corner, and the Devil, in the bottom left.<ref name=":1" /> Along with the naked boy that is supposed to represent Cupid, it is also said to be a symbolism of the victory of power and fame.<ref name=":0" /> |
||
== Provence == |
== Provence == |
||
The painting was done for [[Vincenzo |
The painting was done for [[Vincenzo Giustiniani]]’s brother, the Cardinal [[Benedetto Giustiniani|Benedetto Giustinian]]<nowiki/>i, however, the reason as to why, is unknown. In return, Baglione received a gold chain from Giustiniani.<ref name=":4">{{Cite book |last=Pritchard |first=Shannon |title=Caravaggio’s Capitoline Saint John: An Emblematic Image of Divine Love |publisher=Athanor |year=2005 |pages=35-51}}</ref> |
||
== Other names == |
== Other names == |
||
Revision as of 21:57, 11 May 2023
| Divine Love Conquering Earthly Love | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Artist | Giovanni Baglione |
| Year | 1602–1603 |
| Medium | oil on canvas |
| Location | Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica, Rome |
Divine Love Conquering Earthly Love is an oil on canvas painting dating to 1602–1603, that is now held in the collection of the Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica in Palazzo Barberini, Rome. It was painted by Italian painter Giovanni Baglione. It is the second version that Baglione painted of this subject; the first version is now in the Gemäldegalerie, Staatliche Museen in Berlin. Both of these versions were painted for Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani, who was an Italian clergyman.
The painting was done as a reference and as a response for Caravaggio’s piece Love Victorious, with its debated symbolism of the figures and imagery. This resulted in the rivalry between Baglione and his contemporary, Caravaggio; Baglione accused Caravaggio of circulating poems that were disparaging the painting, which in 1603, resulted into a libel lawsuit.[1][2][3]
Description
The painting, according to the Web Gallery of Art, depicts Eros, the god of love and desire, as an armor-clad angel, as he draws back with his arms, aiming for a final thrust to kill the figure in the bottom right whom Web Gallery also stated to be Cupid.[3] The figure underneath Eros, is a provocatively naked beautiful young boy, in a humanly form, laying defenseless on the ground, according to Google Arts & Culture. Baglione gave this figure religious features, and it was a challenge to Baglione’s contemporary moral values.[1]
Then in the background at the bottom left, there is a devil with faun ears, holding a trident as it crouches down with an anguished and surprise look as it turns to the viewer.[1]
This piece is a depiction of a battle between Eros and Anteros, trying to win over the soul of a man. However, if the two individuals resolved their complication, then they would be achieving the perfect love.[1]
Baglione used elements of Caravaggio’s style, so he wanted make the hue dark by using an intense and direct spotlight in order to create a strong chiaroscuro contrast between the background and the figures in the foregrounds. Similarly, to Caravaggio’s, Love Victorious, the figures are close together in the plane, with the raking light covering only Eros and Cupid as the foreground. Along with this, Baglione was also able to demonstrate naturalism, or the new vision of Caravaggio. However, Baglione does not fully adopt Caravaggio’s technique, and still maintains his traditional approach, Mannerism, which is utilized on the individual figures. [3]
First Version
The first version of the painting is called Divine Love Overcoming Profane Love and was painted in the year 1602. The painting is held in the German art museum, Gemäldegalerie, in Berlin.[1] It is unknown why Baglione painted two versions of this painting; the first version was painted for for Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani. There are slight alterations that can be seen when compared to the second version.
In the first version, Eros is wearing a completely different and less decorated armor. The devil in the bottom left corner is not facing forward; instead the creature is hidden behind Eros. A last feature that can be seen is in the hand positions of both Eros and the human figure of the bottom right corner. Eros's raised right arm is facing outward in its attacking position, while the human figure in the bottom has a slight shift in his right raised hand as well.
Second Version
It is believed that Baglione painted the second version after taking into account the criticism he received prior to the first version. Gentileschi originally had recommended to rework the figure Divine Love, or Eros, to be entirely nude or to be depicted as a child.[4]
History
.jpg)
Since Baglione had been trained by Francesco Morelli, a Tuscan artist, most of artwork was a resemblance to Morelli’s style. However, in approximately in the beginning of the 1600, Baglione was introduced to Caravaggio’s style, and like many other artists at the time, he admired the artist’s work, thus participating in the Caravaggesque style, where he started using elements of Caravaggio’s work. This includes Divine Love Conquering Earthly Love, which Baglione had created at the time as competition against Caravaggio’s work Love Victorious. Baglione incorporated some elements of Caravaggio’s into his work in order to surpass him. However, this displeased Caravaggio and resulted in Caravaggio slandering Baglione’s work.[5]
Caravaggio made this statement against Baglione’s work including Divine Love:
“Or wipe your arse with them
Or stuff them up the cunt of Mao's wife
Because he isn't fucking her anymore with his donkey cock
Pray pardon me, painter, if I do not worship you
Because you don't merit that chain you wear round your neck
And your painting deserves only vituperation.” [6]
After Baglione had unveiled his Resurrection altarpiece for the church of the Gesù in 1603, word started circulating in Rome that Caravaggio and his cronies, Orazio Longhi, Filippo Trisegni, and Orazio Gentileschi, who were disparaging Baglione’s artistic abilities.
These insults lead into a libel lawsuit in the same year, 1603. During the trial, Caravaggio claimed, "I don't know any painter who thinks Giovanni Baglione is a good painter."[7] For centuries, this exact claim tainted Baglione’s reputation and the way his artwork was judged.[5]
Baglione stated that the attackers were only insulting him because they were jealous that he had been the one to receive the commission. More generally because his works were much better than Caravaggio’s by stating that the works were, "held in higher esteem than theirs.” During the trial, when Caravaggio was being interrogated, scholars claim that he still proceeded to add to the insults.[5] Smith O’Neil claims that that with this trial, what Baglione was demonstrating is a vendetta towards Caravaggio and to also prove his virtù.[7]
Towards the end of 1604, the trial had already ended and Baglione’s Caravaggesque era as well.
Symbolism
According to the Psychomachia of Prudentius, it is stated that the painting is a moralizing theme of combat between the vices and the virtues. Petrarch codified that since the devil is a portrait of Caravaggio, that this piece is a satirical punishment to both Caravaggio’s art as well as his moral scruples; it is also a visual representation of sodomy.[3]
Another claim that scholars make when identifying the content, is that the figure in the armor is a depiction of Eros, who is suspected to be representing Divine Love, in which he interrupts a tryst between Cupid, in the bottom right corner, and the Devil, in the bottom left.[3] Along with the naked boy that is supposed to represent Cupid, it is also said to be a symbolism of the victory of power and fame.[1]
Provence
The painting was done for Vincenzo Giustiniani’s brother, the Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani, however, the reason as to why, is unknown. In return, Baglione received a gold chain from Giustiniani.[8]
Other names
- Divine Love Overcoming Earthly Love[5]
- Sacred and Profane Love[1]
- Divine Love Overcoming the World, the Flesh and the Devil[4]
- Divine Love Overcoming the World [8]
Citations
- ^ a b c d e f g The Divine Eros Defeats the Earthly Eros. Google Arts & Culture.
- ^ Schütze, Sebastian (2011). "Caravaggism in Europe". Caravaggio: His Followers in Rome. New Haven: Yale University Press.
- ^ a b c d e "Sacred and Profane Love by BAGLIONE, Giovanni". www.wga.hu. Retrieved 2023-01-25.
- ^ a b Brown, Beverly Louise (1592–1623). The Black Wings of Envy Competition, Rivalry and Paragone. pp. 250–270.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date format (link) - ^ a b c d Zirpolo, Lilian H. (2003). "Review of Giovanni Baglione: Artistic Reputation in Baroque Rome". The Sixteenth Century Journal. 34 (4): 1165–1167. doi:10.2307/20061684. ISSN 0361-0160.
- ^ Graham-Dixon, Andrew (2011-11-10). Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0-393-08293-7.
- ^ a b Ostrow, Steven F. (2003). "Review of Giovanni Baglione: Artistic Reputation in Baroque Rome". The Art Bulletin. 85 (3): 608–611. doi:10.2307/3177390. ISSN 0004-3079.
- ^ a b Pritchard, Shannon (2005). Caravaggio’s Capitoline Saint John: An Emblematic Image of Divine Love. Athanor. pp. 35–51.
Category:1602 paintings Category:1603 paintings Category:Paintings by Giovanni Baglione