3465 Prepare to unleash the dogs...........

.....as I'm about to ask a question that is likely to have me hunted down & flayed alive.....

These Italian artists OK........they are quite good. I've read a few books, been to a few galleries....it's all not bad

.................but answer me this; what did Italy contribute to the art world post the Renaissance?

(OK, I might have to claim that I know of Amedeo Modigliani & the odd daubing that he did, but it's never set the world alight & what's more, one renowned artist in 600 or so years, is dire!)

Did Italians just forget what to do?
Have they sussed it 'today'?

Category
Culture & Entertainment

errr..... hm....... let me see now.......... there is the fascist art in most big cities, there are some interesting painters (e.g. Bernardo Siciliano), I guess lots of fashion is art and Italians define a big part of that, car design is art, there is the Liberty and Baroque styles (I am in Sicily I should know). so I would say - lots of things. Probably not as many as the USA or the UK or France but not bad for a country that went through a rough time.

I accept that there are some; but I was looking more at key events in Italian history that my have kicked off the artistic juices.... the counter-Reformation, Cisalpine, the Risorgimento, Liberation from Fascism, 60s-70s etc...

Can't ignore the Futurists - that was an almost exclusively Italian movement, but had aesthetic and literary repercussions in other countries in Europe.

And there is a big history of wonderful Italian filmmakers - not so well up on film history in terms of "movements", but I bet there is some genre attributed to an Italian master.

Is the spaghetti western an art form?! If so, Ennio Morricone should get a look in for his music scores!

I don't think you need to make any excuses at all for your viewpoint, Tuscanhills. I think that Italian pictorial art and theatre are particularly weak and have been for centuries; less so sculpture, industrial design and fashion.

Perhaps the reason is that much of the money spent on art in Italy is consumed by museums, galleries and restoration, unlike in America, where patronage of the arts often goes to creative artists themselves.

I was disappointed to find this thread - mostly because it is so dreadfully short, and appears to lack any contribution from Italians. I don't know if the original poster was concerned solely with 'art' as in Turner prize, or would extend his horizons into music: we have Puccini, Verdi (and loads of others, I am not a music buff, but there are some C20th composers who can stand alongside Stockhausen), we have Carducci, (poet) the first literature Nobel prize winner, we have in the film area Pasolini, Fellini, Bertolucci, Taviani - all of whom do not have any need to kneel before the likes of Ridley Scott. And nor do the interpreters of their cinematic work.

And as to the 'patronage of living artists' - who are the 'patrons'? Russian billionaires buying the narcissistic agent marketed excesses of the likes of Tracey Emmin or Damien Hurst (and I make no apologies for mis-spelling their names, if I have) in the same way that they would pile into the latest hedge fund.

Sorry - rant over! Come on original poster - drag up some wonderfully important arty Brits/French/Russians/Americans for me to shoot down in flames!

OK, I have to confess that I'd forgotten about this thread, but as it happens there are a number of notable art schools that you may want to place your cross-hairs over.

My point may have been lost though.......at times it can feel that one is in a Rennaissance theme park. We 'did' Florence a long time ago & after a day of it if was moaning, "Oh, no....not [I]another[/I] Rennaissance masterpiece!" So call me a heathen, I never have professed artistic licence (along with little tyle or grace!) but my point remains, did art "die" in Italy in 17C?

[B]Romanticism to Modern art
[/B]Norwich school - 1803 - 1833 | England
Biedermeier - 1815 - 1848, Germany
Realism - 1830 - 1870, began in France
Barbizon school - c. 1830 - 1870, France
Peredvizhniki - 1870, Russia
Hague School - 1870 - 1900, Netherlands
American Barbizon school - United States
Metarealism - 1870, Russia
Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood - 1848 - 1854, England
[B]Modern art[/B]
Russian avant-garde - 1890 - 1930, Russia/Ukraine/Soviet Union
Impressionism - 1863 - 1890, France
Arts and Crafts movement - 1880 - 1910, United Kingdom
Post-impressionism - 1886 - 1905, France
Pointillism 1880s, France
Fauvism - 1904 - 1909, France
Neo-impressionism 1886 - 1906, France
Art Nouveau - 1890 - 1914, France
Modernisme - 1890 to 1910, Catalan
Expressionism - 1905 - 1930, Germany
Bloomsbury Group - 1905 - c. 1945, England
Cubism - 1907 - 1914, France
Bauhaus - 1919 - 1933, Germany
Surrealism Since 1920s, France
Art Deco - 1920s - 1930s, France
Northwest School (art) 1930s - 1940s, United States
Abstract Expressionism - 1940s, Post WWII, United States
Pop Art mid-1950s, United Kingdom/United States

Now, I must confess that my wiki-art lession has thrown up some interesting art periods that are attributed to Italy but they are poor cousins when places next to the work of the Middle Ages.
[LIST]
[*]Macchiaioli - 1850s, Tuscany, Italy
[*]Futurism (art) - 1910 - 1930, Italy
[*]Pittura Metafisica 1917, Italy
[*]Situationism 1957 - early 1970s, Italy[/LIST]

Hi Tuscanhills

Italian art, historically, has been produced for the church and/or rich patrons to a greater extent than other countries. It is also important to remember that art can really only flourish in a society which has a good level of stability - I suggest that was not the situation in much of the timeframe you give.

But, thank you its good to have something with a bit more bite on the site....

Buon Anno

ps. OK, at the time of the Rennaissance it wasn't peace and love to all but there was a measure of social stability because there wasn't the movement between the 'classes'. The small ruling class ruled, there was a very small 'middle class' and the majority spent their lives in poverty - art comes a very poor second to bread. The social action seems to have been between the various ruling families in the non-joined up Italy.

pps Italy may have had its day as far as the leading art producer but I still have 20% of the World's Heritage within 2 hours of my house....(unesco)

ppps Is Italy very different from other cultures that have 'risen and fallen' in artistic terms...
Egypt, Greece, India, China, Peru....

Enough for now..

Well, we could then say that the Renaissance was not a time of great political stability, particularly in Italy; however, the patronage of the Pope and the powerful families obviously gave artists the right climate to foster their talent.
Also, the Renaissance movement did not flourish everywhere, the Southern states where immersed in wars between the Visconti family and the House of Anjou and they did not offer much of a contribution as far as talent is concerned.
Nevertheless, I do agree with Aretina in that it is great to see this type of discussions taking place in the Forum.... A pity I am going away for a few days, I'm going to miss all the fun if this goes on...:madd:

Well, I do agree with the pub-art history brigade who attune their views to Harry Lime in the Third Man who said:

[quote]Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. So long Holly. [/quote]

But that said, France, US & UK have [B][I]not[/I][/B] have shared Italy's political instabilities, but managed to produce more than "cuckoo clocks"

Don't forget to add Spain to the list. It is not all castanets and flamenco dancers. What about Velazquez, Murillo, Goya, Picasso, Dali, Miro... to name a few.... And all this with plenty of political instabilities. A bit of patronage also helped....

Hi, Tuscanhills especially

Would also suggest that Italy has had waves of 'art'... which very few other cultures can match - Etruscan, Greco-Roman, Roman, Medieval, Renaissance, Baroque, Art Deco, etc.

The artists in the renaissance were able to foster their talents, did get work from their very possessive patrons and sometimes got paid,, lucky this because there were not too many lovey gallery owners around at the time to tout for commissions.

Would agree with you Tuscanhills about the 'theme park' reference. I have never felt able to give this label to Florence; it is possible to stand in one tiny piazza in Florence and see four completely different ages and styles of buildings/art.

HOWEVER, much as I loved our recent trip to Venice I couldn't help but liken it to Disneyworld.

You get off the train/park your car, buy your 'water bus pass' and then start to take in the rides and attractions, wonderful yes, but I felt like a 'ticketholder' which is something I never feel in Florence where there appears to be much more 'normal life'.
Florence has been reported (?New York Times late 2007) as the world's most popular tourist destination but it still has its own soul and hasn't sold out to the visitor.

Venice used to trade in spices and other exotic goods now it trades in tourists.
But yes I loved it.

I'm glad I dragged up this thread - it is getting intelligently interesting! I am working on some prospects (just at this moment I'm wondering why Caravaggio, Canaletto and Tiepolo seem to be unacknowledged) - but (short of time) I thought I might back up my rant about best selling contemporary Brit 'artists' with this link.

[url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/richard_morrison/article3191409.ece]Stuffed sharks, mega-bucks and trophy art | Richard Morrison - Times Online[/url]

And, for Gala, after I had posted yesterday I did think - OMG - I've missed out the Spaniards! I'd sling Gaudi in along with Dali and Picasso as an 'artist' (although perhaps better known as a 'well patronised' architect), but I would tend to the opinion (needs a bit more research) that the Spanish contributed a heck of a lot of lasting artistic ideas to the first half of the twentieth century. But so did Nervi (an Italian engineer/architect), and who has heard of him?

[quote=tuscanhills;80667]

But that said, France, US & UK have [B][I]not[/I][/B] have shared Italy's political instabilities, but managed to produce more than "cuckoo clocks"[/quote]

Northern Italy was spilt between Austria and France. Hell western Italy still is under french rule :winki: It would have been common for somebody to travel to court/capital cities . Follow the money thing. Not exactly new. What's her name when she became queen of France brought along a few artists etc.

It would be interesting to see how many of the non-Italian styles in countries like France,US,Austria etc actually had Italians involved.

[quote=Charles Phillips;80720]........I thought I might back up my rant about best selling contemporary Brit 'artists' with this link.

[URL="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/richard_morrison/article3191409.ece"]Stuffed sharks, mega-bucks and trophy art | Richard Morrison - Times Online[/URL]
.......[/quote]

OK, I accept that Emin & Hurst are not my cuppa but if one considers the level of innovation they show, then this has to play into the scheme of it all.....you may not like it (heck, I definitely don't!) but that doesn't mean that it's not art. I'm sure someone would have looked at Picasso when he started daubing & said "It doesn't even look like a person!"

So, I take it you don't like contemporary stuff, but I'm still waiting for your response on the other non-Italian artists/periods that you were going to de-cry..............I'm waiting :bigergrin:

What about Caravaggio and his wonderful paintings of Venice?

I have never been to a Disneyworld, so the allusion to Venice escapes me. But I did find Florence large, busy, and full of tourists (like me) whom you could not escape from.
But for me Venice was an intimate ,magical place, where it was possible to quickly leave the crowds behind, and wander in the alleys, and actually feel the history of the place.

But back to Art, I think you can become saturated in the "fat baby" with Madonna syndrom, and want to scream if you see another one. Thats just me, sure to others they are symbolic and meaningful, did fat babies denote wealth I wonder?, must have been asleep in that art history class.

A

[quote=Angie and Robert;80921]...... must have been asleep in that art history class. [/quote]

I just got cold; with no natural talent on for art, I was 'the life model' ........not a pleasant thought [IMG]http://www.unity.i8i.co.uk/forum/images/smiley_vomit.gif[/IMG]