You know what's behind my grandmother's sofa right now? A PARADE magazine from 1998, a ballpoint pen that doesn't work, and a throw pillow used for so many years that it's the thickness of single-ply toilet paper. THAT'S what you keep behind a couch, not paintings, no matter how ugly they are or how many tennis balls have hit them. FISHY.
I'm with Ted. I'm no Michelangelo scholar, but there's a weird dissonance between the hyperdetail of the musculature and the sloppiness in body contour and body proportion -- it looks to me like somebody painted some bodies and then went back later and added muscles (maybe after studying Michelangelo). Jesus's head is too small and too roughly drawn on a body that is too wide. Mary is too large. Mary's face seems crudely drawn, and I don't know why she's so pissed off -- in the (sculpted) Pieta in St. Peter's, she's sad but solemn, not yelling like somebody poured beer in her weave. I could be wrong, but it seems theologically inaccurate to have her looking up, yelling at God, rather than looking down at her son, mourning but accepting. I can't remember a Michelangelo Mary who isn't calm and looking at Jesus (though obviously I could be missing something).
The composition is uncharacteristically symmetrical, both right-to-left and also up-down with Jesus's limp arms reflecting Mary's upturned ones. The Michelangelo works that spring to mind for me are more naturalistically and less formalistically posed (the Pieta, God giving life to Adam on the Sistine Chapel, David, the slaves, Moses, etc.). And the black background seems more Rembrandt than Michelangelo (who typically painted with blue skies and clouds in the background), which suggest the work of an art student, not the master.
Am not an art historian, but I looked at that painting and thought, "Not a Michelangelo." It just doesn't look like his other paintings, and the modeling of the bodies seems awfully disproportionate for the same artist who carved such incredible sculptures of the human form.
Having said that, wouldn't it be amazing if it were, in fact, a real Michelangelo? It reminds me of From the Mixed Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler.
Very very skeptical. That's an awfully ugly painting for a Michelangelo.
ReplyDeleteAgree 100 million percent. To add content to my agreement, this is an amazing article on authentication of lost masterpieces.
ReplyDeleteYou know what's behind my grandmother's sofa right now? A PARADE magazine from 1998, a ballpoint pen that doesn't work, and a throw pillow used for so many years that it's the thickness of single-ply toilet paper. THAT'S what you keep behind a couch, not paintings, no matter how ugly they are or how many tennis balls have hit them. FISHY.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Ted. I'm no Michelangelo scholar, but there's a weird dissonance between the hyperdetail of the musculature and the sloppiness in body contour and body proportion -- it looks to me like somebody painted some bodies and then went back later and added muscles (maybe after studying Michelangelo). Jesus's head is too small and too roughly drawn on a body that is too wide. Mary is too large. Mary's face seems crudely drawn, and I don't know why she's so pissed off -- in the (sculpted) Pieta in St. Peter's, she's sad but solemn, not yelling like somebody poured beer in her weave. I could be wrong, but it seems theologically inaccurate to have her looking up, yelling at God, rather than looking down at her son, mourning but accepting. I can't remember a Michelangelo Mary who isn't calm and looking at Jesus (though obviously I could be missing something).
ReplyDeleteThe composition is uncharacteristically symmetrical, both right-to-left and also up-down with Jesus's limp arms reflecting Mary's upturned ones. The Michelangelo works that spring to mind for me are more naturalistically and less formalistically posed (the Pieta, God giving life to Adam on the Sistine Chapel, David, the slaves, Moses, etc.). And the black background seems more Rembrandt than Michelangelo (who typically painted with blue skies and clouds in the background), which suggest the work of an art student, not the master.
Wishful thinking, I'm guessing.
I 2nd the cheers to that article from the new yorker.
ReplyDelete'not yelling like somebody poured beer in her weave.'
ReplyDeleteAnd I just snorted water all over my workstation.
Am not an art historian, but I looked at that painting and thought, "Not a Michelangelo." It just doesn't look like his other paintings, and the modeling of the bodies seems awfully disproportionate for the same artist who carved such incredible sculptures of the human form.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, wouldn't it be amazing if it were, in fact, a real Michelangelo? It reminds me of From the Mixed Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler.
I feel like I've seen those abs somewhere before... tiny.cc/2o80n
ReplyDeleteI know - I'm going to have to find a way to work that into conversation, "She looked like the Virgin Mary when that bitch poured beer in her weave."
ReplyDelete