But as to his piousness. I think he's more subversive than Chuck suggests.
Look at his crucifixion of St Peter
I've done some research and do contend this is the only successful painting of this theme. Peter did really have himself crucified upside down in order to deny the vanity of being crucified as Christ was. But an upside down crucifixion poses its own dangers: ridicule, reminder of Tarot "hanged man", etc.
Caravaggio pulls it off by drawing a not yet complete crucifixion: having the cross diagonal and having the effort of the workmen raising the cross (an effort directed upward) counter-balance Peter's vain effort not to be vain.
If you compare this painting with the one in the NYT, you get the same contrast between piety and poverty; it is the poor that ennoble the holy....and that is food for thought. Contrast is visually reinforced in the christ painting with a beam down the middle and in the Peter painting with the cross down the diagonal.
This guy's work really deserves study. Even though the Renaissance painted real bodies; it did not paint real relationships. In fact both the bodies and their relationships were more of a glorification of three dimensional space than anything else. But with Caravaggio you get a use of space and relationships that allows the viewer to inhabit (if he's willing to do the work) a critical space that breaks through the surface narrative -- both painterly and religious.
Joanna ----- Original Message ----- Chuck Grimes writes:
> I had a theory once that I could assemble a show of Caravaggio's work
> and cause the closure of the show
> after the first day by public officials--something
> along the lines of a riot over gay rights.
Heh. But first you'd have to overcome the biggest obstacle: no one has more than a few pieces from Caravaggio, and they notoriously hate each other and won't loan them out.
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk