maria loh - new and improved: repetition as originality in italian baroque practice and theory

Upload: erina-sf

Post on 02-Jun-2018

223 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    1/29

    New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and TheoryAuthor(s): Maria H. LohSource: The Art Bulletin, Vol. 86, No. 3 (Sep., 2004), pp. 477-504Published by: College Art AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4134443

    Accessed: 05/01/2010 14:32

    Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

    http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

    you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

    may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

    Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

    http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caa.

    Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

    page of such transmission.

    JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

    content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

    of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

    College Art Associationis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Art

    Bulletin.

    http://www.jstor.org/stable/4134443?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caahttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caahttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4134443?origin=JSTOR-pdf
  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    2/29

    e w a n d

    Improved

    Repetition

    s

    Originality

    in

    t a l i a n

    a r o q u e

    P r a c t i c e

    a n d

    T h e o r y

    Maria

    H.

    Loh

    In

    her

    essay

    "The

    Originality

    of the

    Avant-Garde,"

    Rosalind

    Krauss concluded

    with

    a

    brief discussion about Sherrie

    Le-

    vine's

    original photographs

    of

    reproductions

    of other

    artists'

    photographs

    (Fig.

    1).

    Originality

    and

    repetition,

    Krauss ar-

    gued,

    could not exist

    without

    each other.

    The former

    was the

    basis for both the

    myth

    of the

    avant-garde

    and,

    in a somewhat

    ironic

    pairing,

    the

    authority

    of institutional

    bodies-that

    is,

    the

    museum,

    the

    historian,

    and the artist. The

    repression

    of

    repetition,

    moreover,

    was

    crucial

    for the

    perpetuation

    of its

    twin.

    Endless

    replication,

    from

    Auguste

    Rodin's

    multiple

    original

    bronze

    casts

    to Levine's

    deliberate

    repetitions,

    chal-

    lenged

    the

    modernist

    obsession

    with

    the

    originality

    of the

    avant-garde.

    In a similarmove, Abigail Solomon-Godeau identified "se-

    riality

    and

    repetition, appropriation,

    intertextuality,

    simula-

    tion or

    pastiche"

    as

    the

    primary

    devices

    employed by post-

    modernist

    artists.2

    More

    generally, Craig

    Owens

    subsumed

    these

    practices

    under

    the

    "allegorical impulse."

    The

    post-

    modern

    artist

    or

    allegorist,

    Owens

    suggested,

    appropriates,

    interprets,

    and confiscates

    images

    not to

    "restore

    an

    original

    meaning

    that

    may

    have been lost

    or

    obscured"but

    instead to

    add,

    replace,

    supplant,

    and

    supplement

    one

    meaning

    with

    another.3

    This

    is

    evident,

    for

    instance,

    in

    Levine's

    photo-

    graphs

    after

    photographs,

    which

    are no

    longer

    about the

    objects

    photographed

    but instead about

    repetition

    as an

    essential

    aspect

    of

    the

    act of

    representation

    in

    and of

    itself.

    Commenting on her own work, Levine borrowed Roland

    Barthes's

    pronouncement

    on the

    death of the

    author;

    sub-

    stituting "painter"

    for

    "author,"

    she

    suggested

    that "the

    viewer is the tablet on which all the

    quotations

    that make

    up

    a

    painting

    are inscribed

    without

    any

    of them

    being

    lost.

    A

    painting's meaning

    lies not

    in

    its

    origin,

    but

    in

    its destination.

    The birth of the viewer

    must be

    at

    the cost

    of

    the

    painter."'

    At

    bottom,

    there is a desire to

    subvert

    the

    institutionalization

    and commercialization of artistic

    production by

    denying

    unique authorship

    and

    objecthood

    to the work of

    art. Two

    epistemological

    transformationscan be

    noted here. The first

    is the

    displacement

    of an

    antiquated

    and

    somewhat reaction-

    ary

    understanding

    of

    originality

    as

    an

    essential

    quality

    of

    the

    omnipotent,

    self-sufficientartistic

    genius

    as manifested in the

    unique object

    the

    singular

    autograph

    painting,

    the autho-

    rized

    photograph, sculpture,

    and so

    on).

    The second

    is

    an

    alternative nvestment in a modified notion of the work of art

    as

    a

    contextwith

    its

    own

    intentions,

    in

    which the

    possibility

    of

    originality

    is

    continuously negotiated

    between the

    producer,

    the

    object,

    and the

    spectator

    with each new

    viewing experi-

    ence.

    Keeping

    these issues in

    mind,

    this

    essay

    will

    explore repe-

    tition as a critical

    strategy

    in

    both

    Baroque practice

    and

    theory."

    With

    the

    renewed interest

    in

    and

    quotation

    of

    Ve-

    netian Renaissance art at the

    beginning

    of the

    seicento,

    originality

    and

    repetition,

    as we shall

    see,

    were

    intimately

    bound to one another in the

    painting

    and artistic

    discourse

    of this

    period.

    Even

    though

    Krauss's

    essay

    has

    acquired

    its

    own

    mythic

    status,

    the

    myth

    of

    originality

    maintains its

    hold

    on art historical

    discourse,

    especially

    when it is concerned

    with

    a

    period,

    like the seventeenth

    century, populated by

    Geniuses and Great Masters. One often

    makes

    the

    assump-

    tion,

    for

    instance,

    that

    originality

    is an

    immanent

    category

    of

    judgment,

    but the term

    "originality"

    is

    itself an

    eighteenth-

    century

    invention.6

    This

    is not to

    say

    that a concern

    with,

    an

    abiding

    interest

    in what

    we now call

    originality

    did not

    exist

    prior

    to its

    formulation as a word.

    In

    order to

    gain

    a better

    understanding

    of

    the

    historical context

    in

    which the term

    "originality"

    came into

    being,

    we

    must

    listen more

    closely

    to

    the discourse that

    brought

    it into existence and that it even-

    tually replaced. Repetition

    played

    an

    important

    role in the

    formulation of both

    Baroque

    practice

    and

    theory.

    Rather

    than

    a classic modernist axis of

    originality

    versus

    repetition,

    premodernist

    discourse

    addressed the

    question

    of artistic

    innovation within the limits of

    imitation and emulation. Sev-

    enteenth-century

    beholders

    articulated their

    reception

    of

    an

    aesthetic mode

    that

    embraced

    demonstrative

    repetition

    through

    its

    own

    historically

    bound

    terms,

    among

    which we

    will consider mixture

    (misto),

    wit

    (acutezza),

    novelty

    (novita),

    theft

    (furto),

    and

    pastiche (pasticcio).

    If

    Barthes

    and Levine

    speak

    about the birth of

    the

    reader/

    viewer at the

    expense

    of

    the death

    of

    the

    author/painter,

    we

    can also entertain the prospect of a more fluid and less binary

    relationship

    between the two

    categories,

    for in all

    cases

    the

    author/painter

    is his or her

    own

    first

    reader/viewer,

    and in

    many

    cases,

    subsequent

    readers/viewers

    are also

    themselves

    authors/painters.7

    This

    is the

    situation,

    in

    any

    case,

    for the

    specific

    group

    of Italian

    Baroque

    artists

    on whom we shall

    concentrate

    here. It

    may

    come as no

    surprise

    to art historians

    of the

    dubiously

    termed

    "early

    modern" that

    many

    postmod-

    ernist attitudes about artistic

    production

    and

    interpretation

    find a certain

    resonance

    in

    both the

    practice

    and

    theory

    of an

    earlier

    premodernist age;

    this

    may

    not, however,

    be so evi-

    dent

    to scholars of

    subsequent periods.

    When

    Julia

    Kristeva referred to the text as a

    "mosaic of

    citations,

    which absorbed and transformed its

    individual com-

    ponents,"

    or when Barthes called it a "tissue of

    quotations"

    and

    a "multidimensional

    space

    in

    which

    a

    variety

    of

    writings,

    none of them

    original,

    blend and

    clash,"

    or

    when

    Jacques

    Derrida described

    it

    as an archive

    of

    "always already transcrip-

    tions"

    (or

    the

    "always-already-read," according

    to Fredric

    Jameson),

    these authors were all

    drawing

    from a classical

    topos

    of eclectic imitation outlined

    by

    authors

    long

    before

    them.8

    Predating postmodernism by

    over three hundred

    years,

    the

    Baroque

    theorist Secondo Lancellotti

    pointed

    out,

    "There are

    many

    books

    in

    one

    book,

    and

    many

    authors

    speak

    through

    the mouth

    of

    one author."

    Crediting

    Aristotle as his

    own

    point

    of

    reference,

    Lancellotti

    explained

    that this

    type

    of

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    3/29

    478

    ART BULLETIN SEPTEMBER 2004 VOLUME LXXXVI

    NUMBER

    3

    1

    Sherrie

    Levine,

    After

    WalkerEvans

    (no. 21),

    black-and-white

    photograph.

    Collection of

    the artist

    invention elicits a certain

    type

    of

    pleasure

    from us because

    "we

    feel

    great

    delight

    when we see two

    equal

    forces

    (or

    two

    forces between

    whom we are unable to detect too much

    difference)

    come

    together

    in

    competition."9

    In

    spite

    of the

    historical and

    ideological

    differences that

    necessarily

    sepa-

    rate Lancellotti from

    Kristeva and the

    others,

    a useful

    paral-

    lelism can nevertheless be

    drawn from the

    postmodern ap-

    preciation

    of

    repetition

    and

    early

    modern theories of

    intertextuality.

    It

    goes

    without

    saying

    that imitation is an

    embedded

    prac-

    tice

    that can be traced in one

    form or another

    throughout

    the

    history

    of Western art.

    Although specific

    motivations and

    ends

    necessarily change,

    imitative

    practices

    remain

    essentially

    the same. In

    certain

    periods,

    artistic

    creation

    is

    said to be

    burdened

    by

    an

    "anxiety

    of influence."10 For

    generations

    of

    post-1789

    artists,

    the

    urgency

    of

    establishing

    a new culture

    that disassociated itself from the

    past may

    have contributed to

    a very real anxiety of influence, but this was not always the

    case

    for

    Baroque practitioners

    and

    spectators.

    In this

    regard,

    because

    postmodern

    theory

    is sensitive to the creative

    possi-

    bilities of

    pastiche, appropriation,

    and

    repetition,

    it offers us

    an

    alternative

    way

    to

    appreciate

    seventeenth-century

    art,

    which is

    more

    generous

    and

    appropriate

    than the Romantic

    myth

    of

    artistic

    genius

    and the

    early

    modernist obsession with

    originality.

    If imitation is

    a

    general

    category

    of artistic

    activity, repeti-

    tion is an

    insistently

    demonstrative

    species

    of

    imitation.

    Rep-

    etition,

    to be more

    precise,

    is a

    particular

    type

    of

    imitative

    creation that

    intentionally glosses, appropriates,

    or recontex-

    tualizes

    previous

    works

    (as

    Levine

    does)

    and that builds into

    the

    logic

    of the work of art the moment of

    recognition

    of the

    repeated

    elements.

    Repetition

    cannot be

    compared,

    for

    in-

    stance,

    to

    forgery,

    which is a form of imitation that does not

    seek

    identification;

    the

    forger

    does not want the viewer to see

    the

    deception,

    whereas the artist of

    repetition

    does."

    Rather

    than

    pursuing originality

    in

    the

    utterly

    new and hitherto

    unseen and

    unheard,

    premodernist

    artists,

    as in the case

    of

    some of their

    postmodernist

    successors,

    enacted a certain

    type

    of

    originality

    that was located

    precisely

    in the imitation

    of

    great

    masters and in the

    competitive repetition

    of eternal

    tropes.

    It is both the

    production

    and articulation of this

    alternative aesthetic of

    repetition

    that concerns us.

    This is not to

    suggest

    that

    Baroque

    artists and theorists

    were

    unanimously receptive

    to an aesthetic of

    repetition,

    or

    that

    repetition

    was somehow the dominant mode of an over-

    generalized Baroque perception,

    rooted

    in a Baxandallian

    notion of a

    period eye. Against

    such an

    understanding,

    these

    remarks attend to the idea of a

    culturally

    and

    group-specific

    lens

    or,

    more

    appropriately

    (as

    we shall hear

    below),

    tele-

    scope.

    The

    recognition

    of

    pastiched

    materials

    in

    works of art

    appealed to a particular mode of aesthetic pleasure that

    coexisted with

    others at a

    given point

    in the

    past.

    If an artist

    like Federico

    Zuccaro accused

    Caravaggio

    of

    imitating

    Gior-

    gione,

    there

    were

    also

    other

    spectators,

    like Giovanni

    Pietro

    Bellori,

    who

    praised

    the Milanese artist for the

    same.'2

    In

    some

    instances,

    repetition

    was

    perceived positively

    as

    wit

    and

    novelty

    and in other instances

    negatively

    as

    theft-although

    even theft could itself be considered a

    good thing

    when in

    the hands of an able

    thief.

    The focus of the

    argument

    that

    follows is

    precisely

    the fine line between

    praise

    and censure

    and the

    problematized

    distinction

    between

    originality

    and

    repetition

    in

    early-seventeenth-century practice

    and

    theory.

    A Tale of Two Cities:

    Venice, Rome,

    and Neo-Venetianism

    In

    1614 a

    virtually

    unknown Venetian

    artist,

    Alessandro Varo-

    tari

    (b.

    1588,

    Padua-d.

    1649,

    Venice),

    who would later be

    known

    as

    Il Padovanino,

    arrived

    in

    Rome,

    where

    he

    copied

    Titian's Bacchanals in the

    palace

    of the Aldobrandini

    family

    (Figs.

    2-4).

    On that occasion the

    twenty-six-year-old

    Pado-

    vanino also

    painted

    a fourth

    picture

    (Fig.

    5),

    which was a

    proficient pastiche

    of

    works

    by

    Venetian, Roman,

    and Bo-

    lognese

    masters of the sixteenth and

    very early

    seventeenth

    century.

    Padovanino

    was

    not alone in

    copying

    the Baccha-

    nals.

    Many

    artists of diverse talent and for different moti-

    vations did the same. Giovanni Andrea Podesti dedicated

    his

    engraved copies

    to Cassiano dal Pozzo and Fabio della

    Corgna

    in order to

    gain

    influence with members of the

    Barberini papal circle. The Florentine painter Giovan Battista

    Vanni was

    paid

    200

    scudi for his

    copy

    of the Bacchanal

    of

    the

    Andrians."

    Peter Paul Rubens

    copied

    the

    two

    Titian

    paintings

    for the

    king

    of

    Spain.'4

    Others made

    replicas

    as an

    aide-m~moire

    for future use.

    Domenichino made

    two

    drawings

    (now lost)

    of Titian's Bac-

    canaria,

    which

    he

    might

    have

    consulted as he

    painted

    his own

    Diana and the

    Nymphs (Fig.

    23)

    for Cardinal Pietro Aldobran-

    dini,

    who in 1616 was the owner of Titian's Bacchanals.'"

    Nicolas Poussin and

    Francois

    Duquesnoy

    made

    sculpted cop-

    ies

    of Titian's

    Worship of Venus.16

    This influence was

    not

    overlooked.

    Baroque spectators

    were

    quick

    to make the con-

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    4/29

    ITALIAN

    BAROQUE

    PRACTICE

    AND THEORY

    479

    2

    Padovanino

    (Alessandro Varotari),

    after

    Titian,

    Worship f

    Venus,

    oil on

    canvas, ca.

    1614.

    Bergamo,

    Accademia

    Carrara

    3

    Padovanino,

    after

    Titian,

    Bacchanal

    of

    the

    Andrians,

    oil on

    canvas,

    ca.

    1614.

    Bergamo,

    Accademia Carrara

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    5/29

    480

    ART

    BULLETIN

    SEPTEMBER

    2004

    VOLUME LXXXVI NUMBER 3

    4

    Padovanino,

    after

    Titian,

    Bacchus

    and

    Ariadne,

    oil on

    canvas,

    ca.

    1614.

    Bergamo,

    Accademia Carrara

    nection

    between

    the

    seventeenth-century

    artists and their

    Renaissance forefather: Orfeo Boselli

    compared

    the tender-

    ness of

    Duquesnoy's sculpted

    infants with

    Titian's;

    Andre

    Felibien and

    Gianlorenzo Bernini connected Poussin's

    style

    with

    Titian's.17

    Anthony

    Van

    Dyck similarly

    transcribed the

    Andrians

    n

    his sketchbook

    (Fig.

    6)

    and

    repeated

    many

    of

    these

    figures

    and

    compositions

    in

    paintings

    like Amarilliand

    Mirtillo

    (Fig.

    7).18

    As

    late as the second

    half of the

    seven-

    teenth

    century,

    the

    Neapolitan

    artist Luca Giordano likewise

    copied

    Titian's Bacchus nd Ariadne

    (Fig.

    8)

    and

    immediately

    reused the

    figures

    in the numerous

    paintings

    after the same

    theme

    that he

    produced

    in

    the 1670s and 1680s

    (Figs.

    9,

    10).

    The

    painted

    copies

    made

    by

    Padovanino and the others

    after

    the Bacchanals

    are not

    demonstrative, creative,

    or com-

    petitive repetitions

    per

    se.

    They

    belong

    to another

    category

    of imitation that fulfills a

    documentary

    purpose

    in

    an

    age

    before

    cameras,

    photocopiers,

    and

    digital reproductions.

    The workslike Domenichino's Diana or Van Dyck'sAmarilli

    that resulted from

    these

    imitations, however,

    are

    proper rep-

    etitions. Padovanino's fourth

    painting certainly

    was.

    Marco

    Boschini,

    the most

    outspoken

    seventeenth-century

    champion

    of Venetian

    painting

    (and

    a

    good

    friend of

    Padovanino's

    family),

    effused in front of

    the four works. Titian's Baccha-

    nals,

    he

    wrote,

    "are

    three

    in

    total,

    but Padovanino of

    his

    own

    invention

    added a

    fourth,

    which is so beautiful and

    good

    and

    which,

    next to the others is

    a

    unique

    construction....

    It is a

    fantastical

    invention,

    currency

    minted from the finest of

    metals." Roman virtuosi and

    artists,

    he

    continued,

    went to

    watch

    the

    young

    artist as he

    painted,

    and

    jealous

    rivals,

    who

    mistook the

    picture

    to be

    by

    Titian

    himself,

    were converted

    into admirers. There was such

    intelligence

    in his

    own

    inven-

    tion that in

    seeing

    this

    painting people

    were astonished.'9

    Many

    of the details

    in

    the

    TriumphFig.5)

    are

    paraphrastic

    repetitions

    from Titian's three Bacchanals.For

    instance,

    the

    tree that extends into the scene from the

    right-hand

    edge

    is

    transplanted

    from Titian's Bacchus

    and Ariadne.The

    ring

    of

    putti dancing

    in

    the

    top right

    corner

    against

    the shadow of

    the tree and the little

    winged putto crawling

    onto the

    plate

    on the left are

    kidnapped

    from the

    Worship f

    Venus.

    The

    ship

    in the

    background

    of Titian's Andrianshas sailed into the

    background

    here. The bacchanalian crowd and luscious

    nudes are rented from the Andrians.The musculature

    and

    tonality

    of the men

    in

    the lower

    right-hand

    corner

    are rem-

    iniscent of the bearded

    figure

    in Titian's

    Bacchus

    nd

    Ariadne

    (itself

    a

    quotation

    of the

    Laoco6n).

    At the same

    time,

    new actors discovered

    in Rome also

    perform on this cinquecento Venetian stage. Michelangelo's

    Sistine Adam

    (Fig.

    11)

    carefully

    reclines in the lower

    left-

    hand corner of the

    Triumph.

    The merriment

    in

    Raphael's

    Farnesina Galatea

    (Fig.

    12)

    is also at work

    in this

    Baroque

    production.

    The

    conch-blowing figure,

    for

    instance,

    has been

    hired for a similar role

    in

    Padovanino's

    party.

    The

    fluttering

    cape

    of the seated

    goddess

    in the

    Triumph

    s a hand-me-down

    from Annibale Carracci'sGalatea

    n

    the Farnese

    Gallery (Fig.

    13)

    or

    perhaps

    Guido Reni's airborne Aurora in the Casino

    Rospigliosi (Fig.

    14).

    Although

    the

    two

    young

    recumbent

    women in the

    foreground

    are

    clearly inspired by

    a

    Ti-

    tianesque

    ideal,

    the immediate

    reference

    may

    have been

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    6/29

    ITALIAN

    BAROQUE

    PRACTICE AND THEORY

    481

    5

    Padovanino,

    Triumph,

    oil on

    canvas,

    ca. 1614.

    Bergamo,

    Accademia Carrara

    from one of Francesco Albani's

    many mythological

    and alle-

    gorical paintings

    of this

    period

    in

    which a similar

    grouping

    is

    used.20

    Although the trio to the right seems to draw its inspira-

    tion from Tintoretto and Palma

    Giovane,

    it also

    points

    to

    certain

    religious images

    that Padovanino would have seen

    in

    Rome

    in

    1614. The attenuated musculature is Titian-

    esque

    and

    classical,

    on the one

    hand,

    and

    thoroughly

    Ro-

    man and

    modern,

    on the other. The tension between the

    push

    and

    pull

    of the

    figures may

    have been influenced

    by

    dramatic

    post-Tridentine

    death scenes such as

    Caravag-

    gio's Martyrdom of

    Saint Matthew

    (Fig.

    15).

    The

    strangely

    bent

    leg

    of Padovanino's female victim

    appears

    like a

    disrobed revision

    of

    Annibale's

    triumphant Virgin

    in the

    Cerasi

    Chapel (Fig.

    16).

    Annibale's

    was

    a

    highly

    unusual

    design

    in

    1601,

    and

    one

    that did not

    go

    unnoticed

    by

    other

    artists.

    Domenichino,

    his own

    pupil, repeated

    the

    pose

    (in

    reverse)

    for

    an

    octagonal ceiling painting

    in

    S.

    Maria in

    Trastevere of the same subject fifteen years later (Fig. 17).

    One

    might suggest

    that Annibale's Cerasi

    Assumption

    sim-

    ilarly inspired

    Padovanino. The bizarre

    positioning

    of the

    woman's

    foot,

    which tries to

    gain purchase

    on the

    aggres-

    sor's back

    in

    the

    Triumph,

    resembles the

    Virgin's step

    on

    the

    putto's

    head

    in

    Annibale's

    Assumption.

    This is not to

    conclude

    that

    they

    are

    indisputably

    Padovanino's

    sources;

    instead,

    they give

    us an

    impression

    of the

    general

    visual

    vocabulary

    of a

    relatively

    well-informed

    early-seventeenth-

    century spectator.

    To modern

    eyes,

    Padovanino's

    Triumph

    may

    appear

    to be

    nothing

    more than

    an

    amusing cut-and-paste

    job.

    In his

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    7/29

    482

    ART

    BULLETIN SEPTEMBER

    2004 VOLUME LXXXVI NUMBER 3

    6

    Anthony

    Van

    Dyck,

    after

    Titian,

    Bacchanal

    of

    the

    Andrians,

    pen

    and

    ink

    drawing, 1622. London, The British

    Museum

    (photo:

    ?

    Copyright

    The

    British

    Museum)

    7 Van

    Dyck,

    Amarilli

    and

    Mirtillo,

    oil

    on

    canvas,

    1631-32.

    Pommersfelden,

    collection of Graf

    von

    Sch6nborn

    (photo:

    Bildarchiv Foto

    Marburg)

    own

    time, however,

    this "invention"

    and

    "unique

    construc-

    tion"

    (to

    quote

    Boschini's earlier

    words of

    praise)

    was

    seen

    not

    negatively

    as

    empty

    derivation or servile

    pastiche

    but

    instead asan

    improvement

    on

    the Bacchanals."There

    are the

    copies

    in

    Venice,"

    Boschini

    remarked,

    "of an admirable

    style

    and of elevated and celebrated

    virtue" hat are

    "by

    he

    perfect

    and

    dignified

    hand of the Vice-Author

    (as

    he is

    called)."21

    When Boschini refers to the

    "perfect

    and

    dignified

    hand of

    the

    Vice-Author,"

    he

    simultaneously acknowledges

    Padovani-

    no's

    presence

    in

    the

    paintings

    and

    points

    to a certain amount

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    8/29

    ITALIAN

    BAROQUE

    PRACTICE AND THEORY

    483

    8 Luca

    Giordano,

    after

    Titian,

    Bacchus

    and

    Ariadne,

    pencil

    and

    pen,

    1665-70.

    London,

    The British Museum

    (photo:

    ?

    Copyright

    The British

    Museum)

    9

    Giordano,

    Bacchus and

    Ariadne,

    oil

    on

    canvas,

    ca. 1685-86.

    Norfolk, Va.,

    The

    Chrysler

    Museum of

    Art,

    Gift of

    Walter P.

    Chrysler, Jr.,

    71.650

    of identifiable

    stylisticmasquerading

    that

    was

    going

    on

    in

    the

    picture. In acknowledgingPadovanino'sagency as the "Vice-

    Author,"

    Boschini

    categorically

    read the

    Triumph

    s a

    pas-

    tiche-or,

    one

    might

    venture,

    as a "mosaicof

    citations,"

    a

    "tissueof

    quotations,"

    a "multidimensional

    space,"

    an archive

    of

    "always lready transcriptions,"

    he

    "always-already-read,"

    and,

    as Lancellotti

    (Boschini

    and Padovanino's

    contempo-

    rary)

    would

    have

    said,

    books within a

    book.22

    Mixed

    Metaphors

    and the

    Objects

    of

    Repetition

    Aside from

    Boschini's

    effusive

    if not

    deliberately provocative

    remarks,

    we

    have

    very

    little written record

    of

    what

    contem-

    porary

    viewers

    thought

    of Padovanino's Bacchanals. There

    are, however,

    plenty

    of

    comparanda.

    Creative or

    demonstrative

    repetition achieved through selective imitation was, as we saw

    with the various

    repetitions

    of the

    Bacchanals,

    a standard

    practice.

    The

    objects

    of

    imitation, meanwhile,

    were various.

    In

    some

    instances,

    an artist chose to imitate another

    artist's

    style

    (maniera);

    in other

    cases,

    similar themes

    (concetti)

    and

    even

    specific

    details

    (figure)

    were

    repeated.

    Several

    authors,

    for

    example,

    observed that Rubens

    consciously

    painted

    the

    altarpiece

    for the Oratorians in Rome in the

    style

    of Paolo

    Veronese.

    Bellori wrote that it was based

    on the "intentions

    [intentione]"

    of

    Veronese.23

    Other

    Baroque

    art

    critics,

    such

    as

    Filippo

    Baldinucci

    and

    Roger

    de

    Piles,

    said it was

    in the

    style

    or

    "taste

    [gusto/gouste]"

    of

    Veronese.24

    And still

    other

    paint-

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    9/29

    484

    ART

    BULLETIN SEPTEMBER

    2004

    VOLUME LXXXVI NUMBER 3

    10

    Giordano,

    Bacchus

    and

    Ariadne,

    oil

    on

    canvas,

    ca. 1675-77.

    Coventry,

    Herbert Art

    Gallery

    and Museum

    (photo:

    ?

    Herbert Art

    Gallery

    &

    Museum)

    11

    Michelangelo,

    Creation

    of

    Adam,

    fresco,

    ca. 1511.

    Vatican,

    Sistine

    Chapel

    ings

    by

    the Flemish master were seen as

    interpretations

    of

    Titian's "ideas

    [idea]."25

    In

    other

    cases,

    different referential

    layers might

    be distin-

    guished. According

    to the

    seventeenth-century Bolognese

    biographer

    Carlo Cesare

    Malvasia,

    Reni

    painted

    a

    girl

    in

    "the

    taste

    [gusto]

    of

    Raphael,"

    an older woman

    in

    the "taste of

    Correggio,"

    a

    shepherd

    in

    the "tasteof

    Titian,"

    and a nude

    in

    the "taste of

    Michelangelo,"

    all in the same fresco at S.

    Michele

    al

    Bosco.26

    Seventeenth-century

    artists and works

    were not the

    only

    ones to be

    placed

    under this taxonomical

    gaze. Looking

    at Tintoretto's

    Assumption f

    the

    Virgin

    n the

    church of the

    Gesuiti,

    Boschini concluded that "all of the

    styles

    [maniere]

    are united here: there is Paolo

    Veronese,

    Titian, Schiavone, and Bassano.""27 iulio Mancini, the

    Sienese art writer and

    papal

    doctor,

    referred to El Greco as

    "thatGreek

    [artist]

    who

    operated

    in Titian's

    style

    [maniera],"

    which seems to

    suggest

    that,

    in

    the first decades of the

    seicento,

    some authors still considered Tintoretto's

    style

    (with

    which the Greek

    painter

    is more

    commonly aligned)

    as

    an extension of Titian's late

    style.28

    The term "mixture" or

    "mix"

    (misto)

    was

    often used to

    describe

    stylistic repetition.

    In

    a letter to

    Bellori,

    Albani

    specified

    that

    his

    master,

    Annibale

    Carracci,

    successfully

    "combined

    into one

    style"

    the art

    of

    Correggio,

    Titian,

    Ra-

    phael,

    and

    Michelangelo, producing

    a

    perfect

    misto hat ac-

    commodated the best

    quality

    of each individual artist.29At

    the

    beginning

    of the

    eighteenth century,

    Pellegrino

    Antonio

    Orlandi would

    similarly

    use mistoon numerous occasions to

    explain stylisticpolyphony.

    He

    wrote,

    for

    instance,

    that Giulio

    Procaccini found his

    "own, true,

    and natural

    style" hrough

    a

    "Raphaelesque, Correggesque, Titianesque,

    and Carrac-

    cesque

    misto";

    hat Annibale's

    style

    consisted of a

    "great

    Cor-

    reggesque, Parmigianesque,

    and

    Titianesque

    misto";

    hat

    Lodovico Carracciadded to his

    study

    of works

    by

    old masters

    a

    certain "Lombard

    misto";

    hat Cammillo

    Rama's

    paintings

    betrayed

    both the

    style

    of his

    master,

    Palma

    Giovane,

    and

    a

    "Tintoresque

    misto."30

    isto,

    herefore,

    articulateda model of

    repetition

    based on

    judicious

    selection or

    eclecticism.

    Good literary style was acquired through the discriminat-

    ing

    imitation, recombination,

    and transformationof

    previous

    and

    existing

    authors. This was a recurrent theme in Renais-

    sance treatises on imitation.

    Writing

    in the

    1550s,

    Giambat-

    tista GiraldiCinzio identified

    Virgil

    as the "rule

    ofjudgment"

    because

    "knowing

    human

    imperfection

    to be as it

    is,

    that a

    single

    man could not

    accomplish

    on his

    own the virtue of

    composing great things," Virgil,

    he

    wrote,

    "with marvelous

    judgment

    chose all of the

    good things

    that

    were

    to

    be found

    in

    all of the other Greek and Latin authors and

    gathered

    them into one" and

    in

    doing

    so

    provided

    "an

    utterly

    truthful

    example

    of

    the

    synthesis

    of Heroic

    grandeur."

    From the dark

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    10/29

    ITALIAN

    BAROQUE

    PRACTICE AND THEORY

    485

    shadows,

    Virgil gathered together

    the best

    examples

    of

    poetry

    and

    "marvelouslycomposed

    them

    in

    one beautiful

    body."

    Like

    painters

    who want to form a

    single image

    of female

    beauty, Virgil proceeded by "looking

    at all the beautiful

    women that

    they

    can and then

    by taking

    from each of them

    their best

    parts"

    n order "to achieve the Idea that

    they

    have

    in their

    minds"

    of "ultimate

    perfection."31

    In

    his

    explanation

    of

    Virgil's exemplarity,

    Giraldi resorted

    to a number of

    tropes

    that were standard fare

    in

    writings

    about imitation. Above all was the notion that absolute

    per-

    fection

    ("l'ultima

    perfettione")

    or the Idea that

    preexisted

    in

    the mind of

    the

    artist

    ("1I

    Idea

    c'hanno

    nell'animo")

    con-

    sisted in the

    choosing ("scieglier"), aking ("togliono"), gath-

    ering ("accogliesse"),

    and

    synthesis

    ("la

    virti'

    del

    comporre")

    of those

    parts

    that would

    produce

    a beautiful

    body

    ("un

    bellissimo

    corpo").

    This

    "body,"

    moreover,

    was

    gendered

    in

    Giraldi's

    passage

    as the heroic

    exemplum

    ("della

    grandezza

    Heroica")

    in

    masculine terms and as idealized

    beauty

    ("la

    donnesca

    bellezza")

    in

    feminine terms.

    There was

    nothing particularlyoriginal

    in

    Giraldi's

    using

    female

    beauty

    as a

    metaphor

    for

    good

    imitation. The locus

    classicus or this typeofjudicious imitation was the tale of the

    Crotonian maidens told

    by Pliny

    and Cicero and reiterated

    in

    just

    about

    every

    text on imitation

    thereafter.32

    Raphael

    glossed

    the Zeuxinian

    metaphor

    almost

    verbatim

    in the de-

    scription

    of his

    own

    artistic

    practice,

    and

    Giorgio

    Vasari

    used

    similarterms to

    praise Raphael."3

    There was also

    nothing

    new

    in

    Giraldi's

    using

    heroic

    grandeur

    as

    metaphor

    for

    good

    12

    Raphael,

    Galatea, resco,

    ca.

    1511.

    Rome,

    Villa Farnesina

    (photo:

    ?

    Alinari

    /

    Art

    Resource,

    NY)

    13 Annibale

    Carracci,

    Polyphemus

    nd

    Galatea, resco,

    1597-

    1600.

    Rome,

    Galleria Farnese

    imitation.

    The

    image

    of

    the Hero

    served

    as a masculine

    parallel

    to the Zeuxinian

    woman,

    and

    Torquato

    Tasso,

    more

    than

    any

    other

    late-sixteenth-century

    author,

    would be re-

    sponsible

    for

    consolidating

    Renaissance theories of eclectic

    imitation into a new definition of the

    epic

    hero as a sort of

    Ubermensch

    who

    possessed

    the best virtues drawn from all

    previous

    heroes.

    Whether

    the artist alluded to the Zeuxinian

    Virgin

    or the

    Epic

    Hero,

    his

    preference

    for this

    style

    of

    composition

    in

    the

    late Renaissance extended from the

    theory

    of selective

    imi-

    tation that Gianfrancesco Pico advocated at the

    beginning

    of

    the sixteenth

    century

    in

    opposition

    to Pietro Bembo's

    pref-

    erence for the imitation of a

    single exemplary

    model for each

    genre.34

    In

    the

    following century,

    the Carracci would

    be cited

    as

    the

    paradigmatic

    masters and

    proponents

    of the first tech-

    nique.

    In

    Malvasia's

    biography,

    Lodovico is heard

    telling

    Annibale: "to imitate a

    single

    master is to make oneself his

    follower and his

    inferior,

    while to draw from all of them and

    also select things from other painters is to make oneself their

    judge

    and

    leader."3"

    In the same

    vein,

    Piles

    pointed

    out that

    the

    "perceptive

    Annibale took from these Great Men

    every-

    thing

    that was

    good"

    and "converted it into his own sub-

    stance."36 Bellori

    praised

    Annibale's

    art

    for

    combining

    the

    "virtues

    of

    previous

    masters" and

    unifying

    that

    perfected style

    with the Idea and with

    nature.37

    The

    advantage

    of a

    combinatory

    method

    also corre-

    sponded

    to a belief

    in

    the inherent

    imperfection

    of both man

    and nature. Cicero

    explained

    that Zeuxis selected five maid-

    ens

    precisely

    because "he did not think all the

    qualities

    which

    he

    sought

    to combine could be found in one

    person,

    because

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    11/29

    486

    ART

    BULLETIN

    SEPTEMBER

    2004

    VOLUME LXXXVI

    NUMBER 3

    14 Guido

    Reni,

    Aurora,

    resco,

    1612-

    14.

    Rome,

    Palazzo

    Pallavicini-

    Rospigliosi,

    Casino dell'Aurora

    15

    Caravaggio,

    Martyrdom f

    Saint

    Matthew,

    oil

    on

    canvas,

    1600.

    Rome,

    S.

    Luigi

    dei

    Francesi,

    Contarelli

    Chapel

    in

    no

    single

    case

    has Nature

    made

    anything perfect

    and

    finished in

    every part.""38riting

    about

    painting

    in the

    years

    just

    before Giraldi's

    reatise,

    Lodovico Dolce added

    that

    only

    through art is it possible to display"withina single body ...

    that

    entire

    perfection

    of

    beauty

    which nature

    barely

    exhibits

    in

    a

    thousand

    bodies."

    Hence,

    because "there is

    no human

    body

    so

    perfectly

    beautiful that it

    is not

    wanting

    in

    some

    respect,"

    selective

    imitation was a

    matter of

    necessity.39

    The

    eclectic

    principle,

    therefore,

    was

    at once

    an aesthetic

    and a

    moral one

    (and

    this

    may

    have had

    particular

    significance

    in

    a

    post-Tridentine

    era,

    when the Church

    encouraged

    the

    imitationnot

    only

    of Christ

    but also of the

    Virgin

    and

    saints).

    The

    popularity

    of

    this model of

    imitation is reflected in the

    various

    metaphors

    that Renaissance

    and

    Baroque

    authors

    generated

    to describe

    the

    process.40

    n

    the 1590 treatise the

    Idea

    del

    tempio

    di

    pittura,

    for

    instance,

    Giovanni

    Paolo Lo-

    mazzo

    constructed an

    elaborate

    astrological system,

    in

    which

    each

    of the seven celestial

    sectors-Saturn,

    Jupiter,

    Mars,

    the

    Sun, Venus, Mercury, and the Moon-were controlled by

    seven

    governatori-Michelangelo,

    Gaudenzio Ferrari

    (Lomaz-

    zo's

    uncle and

    master),

    Polidoro da

    Caravaggio,

    Leonardo,

    Raphael,

    Andrea

    Mantegna,

    and Titian.41

    Elsewhere,

    Lo-

    mazzo

    wrote that the

    perfect

    painting

    would be an Adam

    and

    Eve

    in

    which Adam was

    drawn

    by Michelangelo

    and

    painted

    by

    Titian and Eve was

    designed

    by Raphael

    and colored

    by

    Correggio.42

    The immediate source for this

    version of the Zeuxinian

    story may

    have been a

    passage

    from

    Lucian,

    as

    Charles

    Demp-

    sey

    discovered,

    in

    which a statue of an ideal

    woman was

    described

    as a collaborative

    production

    undertaken

    by

    the

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    12/29

    ITALIAN

    BAROQUE

    PRACTICE AND THEORY

    487

    best artists:

    "Euphranor giving

    her the hair he

    gave

    his

    Juno,

    Polygnotus

    the

    delicately

    tinted brows and cheeks of his

    Cassandra,

    Aetion the

    lips

    of his

    Roxana,

    and

    Apelles paint-

    ing

    the

    body

    as he had

    painted Campaspe."43

    This

    was

    a

    significant

    and essential

    modification of the

    topos,

    for the

    peccadillo

    of

    imperfection

    was

    transferred

    from the source

    material

    (that

    is,

    nature)

    to the artist himself

    (that

    is,

    human

    nature). Hence,

    when Orlandi wrote that the Venetian

    painter

    Pietro Liberi

    developed

    his

    well-grounded style

    through

    "a

    perfect

    mistd'

    of the

    great

    masters of the

    past,

    he

    implied

    (as

    Pico had centuries

    before)

    that no one master

    could

    provide

    the artist

    with

    a

    complete

    model of

    perfec-

    tion.44

    For

    Lomazzo,

    the

    collaboiation

    of the best

    styles provided

    the foundation for

    good painting.

    For other

    writers,

    such as

    Francesco

    Scannelli,

    it was a

    question

    of

    absorbing

    the

    very

    essence of each of these

    paradigmatic

    masters. Scannelli's

    ideal

    painter

    in

    I1

    microcosmo della

    pittura

    (Cesena, 1657)

    possessed

    organs represented by

    different artists:

    Raphael

    was

    the liver

    (which

    receives from the blood of

    the mother its

    composition

    and

    perfection),

    Titian the heart

    (for

    the nour-

    ishment

    provided

    to it

    by

    the liver makes the heart more

    vigorous

    and

    forceful,

    which makes

    everything

    in

    turn more

    natural and

    sane),

    and

    Correggio

    the brain

    (for

    a

    healthy

    liver

    and

    heart enable the brain to order its

    thoughts

    and

    compose

    its

    arguments).45

    Boschini commenced the

    Carta

    del

    navegar

    pitoresco

    (Venice, 1660)

    with an

    image

    even more esoteric than both

    Lomazzo's and Scannelli's models:

    Venetian

    painting

    as a

    "pictorial ship."

    On Boschini's

    metaphoric ship

    of ideal

    style,

    individual artists

    simultaneously symbolized

    different struc-

    tural

    parts

    of the vessel and held

    specific

    roles on board.

    Giovanni Bellini was at once the structure and the builder of

    the

    ship.

    Giorgione

    was

    the

    rudder that

    provided

    direction

    and the patron who nurtured the crew. II Pordenone repre-

    sented the ribs of the

    hull;

    Jacopo

    Bassano the

    captain's

    quarters

    as well as the storerooms and the

    night guard;

    Giovanni Battista Zelotti the

    mast;

    Giuseppe

    Salviati the sail

    and

    watchman;

    Paris Bordone the

    stern;

    Paolo Veronese the

    navigation light

    and

    manager;

    Andrea Schiavone the caulk

    and Palma Vecchio the tar that held the

    structure

    together

    and also the helmsman and assistant

    captain.

    Tintoretto's

    fierce

    style

    made him

    the cannons and the commander of the

    artillery,

    and

    Boschini's

    hero, Titian,

    was the

    supreme

    navi-

    gator

    and

    captain

    of

    the

    metaphoric

    boat.46

    Even Padovanino

    was

    given

    a

    role,

    as the standard-bearer of the

    squadron.47

    At

    bottom,

    it seems that

    Lomazzo,

    Scannelli,

    and Boschini

    were concerned with defining ideals: painting, the painter,

    and

    style;

    in

    spite

    of their different

    approaches,

    all three

    resorted to

    metaphors

    of eclecticism. This

    type

    of

    metonymic

    classification

    was

    based

    on two ancient

    sources,

    the first

    being

    the

    passage

    from Lucian

    already

    mentioned

    above.

    The sec-

    ond

    point

    of reference was the twelfth book of

    Quintilian's

    Institutio

    oratoria,

    in

    which

    he lists

    the

    stylistic strengths

    of

    individual

    painters

    and

    sculptors

    as a

    parallel

    for the various

    styles

    of

    oratory (Polygnotus

    and

    Aglaophon

    for their

    simple

    coloring;

    Zeuxis and Parrhasius for their

    special

    attention to

    line;

    Protogenes

    for his

    accuracy; Pamphilius

    and

    Melanthius

    for their soundness of

    taste;

    Antiphilius

    for his

    facility;

    Theon

    16 Annibale

    Carracci,

    Assumption

    of

    the

    Virgin,

    oil on

    panel,

    1601.

    Rome,

    S. Maria del

    Popolo,

    Cerasi

    Chapel

    of Samos for his

    depiction

    of

    imaginary

    scenes;

    and

    Apelles

    for

    his

    grace).48

    Following

    Quintilian's

    formula,

    seicento authors

    similarly

    enumerated lists of ideal models. Bernini's admiration for

    Annibale Carracci was summarized

    in

    a

    metaphor

    of

    gastro-

    nomic mixture:

    [Annibale]

    had combined the

    grace

    and

    draftsmanship

    of

    Raphael,

    the

    knowledge

    and anatomical science of Michel-

    angelo,

    the

    nobility

    of

    Correggio

    and this master's

    manner

    of

    painting,

    the

    coloring

    of

    Titian,

    the fertile

    imagination

    of Giulio Romano and Andrea

    Mantegna.

    His manner was

    formed from the ten or twelve

    greatest painters

    as if

    by

    walking through

    a kitchen he had

    dipped

    into each

    pot,

    adding

    from each a little to his own mixture.49

    Bernini

    may

    have based his comments

    on a

    passage

    from

    Malvasia's

    biography

    of Annibale

    in

    which

    he

    specified

    that

    in

    order to become a

    good painter,

    one

    must

    acquire

    "Ro-

    man

    disegno,

    the movement and

    shadowing

    of the

    Venetians,

    and the

    dignified

    colors of

    Lombardy,"

    or,

    more

    specifically,

    one must take "from

    Michelangelo

    the awesome

    way,

    the

    true

    and natural from

    Titian,

    the

    pure

    and refined

    style

    from

    Correggio,

    decorum and

    structure from

    Tibaldi,

    invention

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    13/29

    488

    ART BULLETIN SEPTEMBER

    2004

    VOLUME

    LXXXVI NUMBER 3

    17

    Domenichino,

    Assumptionof

    the

    Virgin,

    oil on

    canvas,

    1616-17.

    Rome,

    S. Maria in Trastevere

    from the wise

    Primaticcio,

    and a bit of

    grace

    from

    Parmigi-

    anino."50

    Baroque

    authors,

    it would

    appear,

    took

    special pleasure

    in

    compiling

    their

    own

    canon of ideal models.

    Piles,

    in

    partic-

    ular,

    loved this

    sort of

    game,

    even

    if his

    pantheon

    was

    pop-

    ulated

    by

    the usual

    suspects: Raphael

    for his

    invention,

    Mi-

    chelangelo

    for

    drawing,

    Giulio Romano

    for

    nobility

    and

    magnificence,

    Correggio

    for force and

    vigor,

    Titian for

    color,

    composition,

    naturalism,

    and

    grace,

    and Paolo Veronese

    for

    his

    invention,

    the

    nobility

    of his

    figures,

    the

    magnificence

    of

    his

    drapery,

    and the

    facility, beauty,

    and movement

    of

    his

    forms.5'

    The

    strangely

    Cartesian charts that Piles

    graphs

    in

    the Balance des

    peintres

    (Paris, 1708),

    where artists

    are

    judged

    on a scale of one to

    twenty

    for their

    composition, drawing,

    color,

    and

    expression,

    can be seen

    as an extreme

    manifesta-

    tion of this taxonomic impulse.52

    In

    spite

    of the

    popularity

    of such

    "mixed"

    metaphors,

    it

    does not follow that an established

    doctrine

    of eclecticism

    dominated seicento

    theory

    and

    practice.53

    This

    was

    one

    way

    of

    theorizing practice,

    and

    while

    some artists

    might

    have

    prac-

    ticed

    this

    theory,

    not

    everyone

    was convinced

    of the effective-

    ness of the eclectic

    method. Pietro da Cortona

    considered

    it

    faulty,

    for

    who would

    find

    beauty

    in a

    figure composed

    of

    parts

    melded

    together

    from

    two

    antithetical

    painters

    such

    as

    the Cavaliere

    d'Arpino

    and

    Caravaggio?54 Despite

    his own

    anthropomorphic

    metaphor,

    Scannelli

    questioned

    the

    soundness of Lomazzo's fictive Adam and

    Eve:

    Titian,

    he

    argued,

    would

    try

    to correct

    Michelangelo's drawing

    in his

    own

    style,

    and

    Michelangelo

    would

    not stand for

    it.55 Bernini,

    in

    spite

    of his admiration

    for

    Annibale,

    was also

    wary

    of the

    success rate of the eclectic

    method,

    fearing

    that the overall

    effect would

    be one of

    fragmentation.56

    Against

    the Zeuxin-

    ian

    Virgin,

    writers would

    posit

    the

    grotesque

    Horatian mon-

    ster-the human with

    the head of a

    horse,

    the woman with

    the

    body

    of a fish-as

    an

    example

    of the

    dangers

    of eclecti-

    cism.

    This indicates

    that the

    stitching

    on Zeuxis's

    Virgin

    was

    more evident

    to some viewers than

    to

    others,

    and to her

    critics she

    appeared

    more like Frankenstein's bride than

    a

    vision

    of

    beauty.

    A more moderate

    point

    of view advised artists

    against

    mak-

    ing

    a

    grotesque hodgepodge

    of collected

    bits and bobs that

    did not

    belong together

    and to

    proceed,

    instead,

    like an

    "ingenious bee" that extracts "sweetness from all the flowers

    of

    painting"

    and turns

    it into

    honey.57

    In

    the

    metaphors

    of

    the "mixed"

    style,

    it was

    a

    question

    of

    ensuring,

    in the first

    place,

    that the

    components

    chosen

    for imitation would be

    compatible

    one

    with

    the other

    and,

    secondly,

    that this eclec-

    tic imitation would

    enable a

    more

    independently

    achieved

    transformative

    imitation.

    In

    other

    words,

    while

    repetition

    was

    the modus

    operandi,

    the final

    product

    had to be ordered

    by

    a

    unified idea del

    bello.

    Critics borrowed the

    apian

    metaphor

    and similar ones

    involving

    digestion,

    fathers

    and

    sons,

    and

    singers

    and choruses from Seneca's

    eighty-fourth

    letter to

    Lucilius,

    "On

    Gathering

    Ideas."58

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    14/29

    TALIAN

    BAROQUE

    PRACTICE

    AND THEORY

    489

    Underlying

    the

    discourse,

    which circumvented the

    expla-

    nation

    of

    the

    artist's

    practice

    of eclectic imitation

    and

    the

    visual

    exegete's process

    of

    recognizing

    the

    "mixed"

    style,

    was

    an acute consciousness of a

    copresence

    of different identities

    within

    one

    entity.

    Seneca's

    parallel

    between fathers

    and

    sons

    was one of the most

    poetic metaphors

    about imitation. Some

    centuries

    later,

    Francesco Petrarch

    (glossing

    Seneca)

    would

    explain

    that in imitation the

    similarity

    should be not like that

    of

    a

    portrait

    to

    the

    man it is

    portraying

    but like that of a

    child

    to his

    parent,

    for "in this

    case,

    even

    though

    there

    may

    be a

    considerable

    dissimilarity

    in

    features,

    yet

    there

    is a

    certain

    shadow

    ...

    [that]

    ... recalls to our mind the

    memory

    of the

    father....

    something

    hidden there has

    this

    effect.""59

    n

    sev-

    enteenth-century

    terms,

    Matteo

    Peregrini

    referred to

    this

    interpretative optic

    that

    successfully

    identified that

    "certain

    shadow" as

    "amphibolia

    [Amfibolia]"

    or as an

    ability

    to

    see the

    "double

    sense

    [senso

    doppio].,'60

    Through

    the

    Looking

    Glass of

    Acutezza:

    Speaking

    Metaphorically, Seeing

    Metaphorically

    Baroque spectators

    were

    open

    to the

    type

    of

    aesthetic

    expe-

    riences based on

    sharp,

    associative,

    lateral

    thinking,

    which

    looked for shadows of

    the father

    in

    the

    son,

    which

    engaged

    with

    the "double

    sense,"

    which

    embraced the

    metaphor

    and

    the

    double

    entendre,

    and

    which looked

    for

    the intertext and

    engaged

    with

    intentional

    play.

    David

    Freedberg argued

    that

    the first

    quarter

    of

    the seicento

    witnessed

    an

    intense

    curiosity

    about

    optical

    devices

    such as

    telescopes

    and

    microscopes.61

    The

    development

    of these new

    instruments normalized

    the

    concept

    of

    multiple

    perception; spectators

    were

    capable

    of

    seeing

    and,

    more

    important,

    of

    expecting

    to

    see more than

    meets

    the

    eye.

    This

    very curiosity

    has

    specific implications

    for

    our

    understanding

    of

    repetition

    in

    the visual and

    literary

    arts.

    In classical

    rhetoric,

    the vehicle for

    demonstrating

    artistic

    ingenuity was the witticism (acutezza). A witticism was a

    pointed saying,

    an

    expression

    that

    generated

    wonder,

    and an

    oratorical device that

    functioned like what

    Quintilian

    called

    sententias,

    which are

    pithy

    statements that "strike the mind

    and

    often

    produce

    a decisive

    effect

    by

    one

    single

    blow,

    while

    their

    very brevity

    makes

    them

    cling

    to the

    memory.""62

    Witti-

    cisms

    pushed

    the listener and

    viewer to

    think

    metaphorically

    since,

    as Aristotle

    wrote,

    "metaphors

    must

    be

    drawn

    ... from

    things

    that

    are related

    to

    the

    original thing,

    and

    yet

    not

    obviously

    so

    related-just

    as in

    philosophy

    also an

    acute

    mind

    will

    perceive

    resemblances even in

    things

    far

    apart.""63

    even-

    teenth-century

    literary

    critics,

    like Emanuele

    Tesauro,

    turned

    Aristotle's

    appreciation

    of

    metaphor

    into a

    Baroque theory

    of

    acutezza,

    for

    both the

    metaphor

    and the witticism

    say

    one

    thing

    while

    suggesting

    another. Such rhetorical ornaments

    multiply

    the listener's

    delight

    since,

    as Tesauro

    explained,

    "seeing

    many objects

    from an unusual

    angle

    is more curious

    and

    pleasing

    than

    seeing

    the same

    things passing

    directly

    before

    our

    eyes. Ajob

    (as

    our

    author

    [Aristotle]

    says)

    not for

    a dull mind

    but for a most acute one."64 This

    delight

    is

    magnified by novelty,

    which is when "the sound is known and

    only

    the

    meaning

    is new" or when

    something

    is "old in

    substance and new in

    manner." The

    leading

    Baroque

    theorist

    of

    acutezza,

    Tesauro,

    still

    glossing

    Aristotle,

    asserted that the

    metaphor packs "objects tightly together

    in a

    single

    word and

    almost

    miraculously

    allows

    you

    to see one inside the

    other."""65

    At

    bottom,

    seeing

    metaphorically

    was all about

    being

    able

    to

    see several

    things

    at once

    (for

    example,

    the new in the

    old

    and vice

    versa)

    and to see one

    thing

    in several

    ways

    (such

    as

    originality

    in

    repetition).

    Through

    the

    Baroque looking

    glass

    of

    acutezza,

    knowledge-

    able

    spectators proceeded

    both

    microscopically

    and

    telescop-

    ically

    when

    viewing images, moving

    from one detail to an-

    other in order

    to

    see

    the

    larger

    whole. The

    ability

    to

    see

    strategic repetition

    was

    particularly enjoyable

    for certain

    view-

    ers, for,

    according

    to one

    writer,

    "Imitation lies

    hidden;

    it

    does not stand out.

    It

    conceals

    rather than reveals itself and

    does not wish to be

    recognized

    except

    by

    a learned

    man."66

    Like

    the humanist reader

    (and

    the

    postmodernist

    reader/author

    as

    well)

    who was able to

    identify

    the mosaic of

    quotations

    within a

    given

    text,

    the

    "learned

    man"

    found

    gratification

    through

    intellectual

    snobbery

    and the

    pleasure

    of

    untangling

    difference from

    repetition.

    Tesauro wrote

    that "wit loses its

    insight

    when a

    saying

    is

    too

    clear."

    However,

    he

    continued,

    "Stars

    sparkle

    in

    the

    darkness,

    but become dim in

    the

    light," meaning

    that certain

    types

    of

    literary

    conceits function

    only

    when the

    author and reader

    are aware of the rules of

    engagement.

    Since

    witty images

    "are

    sketched

    rather than

    finished,"

    as

    Tesauro further

    elabo-

    rated,

    "the listener

    supplies

    what is absent in the

    voice of the

    speaker."

    Because

    of

    these

    collaborative

    efforts,

    witticisms

    and

    metaphors

    necessarily possess

    a "double

    pleasure,"

    for

    the "one who forms a

    witty

    concept

    and

    another

    who hears

    it.

    For the

    first

    enjoys

    giving

    life in another

    intellect to a

    noble

    product

    of his

    own,

    and

    the second

    enjoys

    grasping by

    his

    own

    ingenuity

    what the

    ingenuity

    of another

    furtively

    hides.""'67

    When

    the Lucchese

    painter

    Paolo

    Guidotti,

    for

    example,

    set

    about

    composing

    his

    (unrealized)

    poem

    La

    Gerusalemmedistrutta in

    emulation of

    Tasso's

    epic

    La

    Gerusa-

    lemme liberata

    (Venice, 1581),

    he

    intended and

    expected

    his

    readers to notice that the last line of each octave was in fact

    the same as in Tasso's

    poem.68 Witty

    conceits,

    in

    short,

    were

    reserved

    for

    the

    quick

    of

    mind,

    for an audience attentive

    to

    the

    possibility

    of

    double

    meanings

    and on

    whom allusions

    would not be

    lost.

    Again,

    the use of

    witty

    conceits was a matter

    of taste.

    Galileo,

    inventor of the

    telescope, preferred

    the

    clarity

    of

    Lodovico Ariosto's

    style

    to the

    allegorical

    mode

    (or

    "im-

    pulse")

    of

    Tasso's

    poetry.69

    Giambattista

    Marino,

    the self-

    professed poet

    of

    extravagance

    whose hero was

    Tasso,

    reveled

    in the

    use

    of

    witticisms. The

    Jesuit

    orator

    Sforza

    Pallavicino,

    in his

    Considerazioni

    sopra

    l'artedello stile

    e

    del

    dialogo

    (Rome,

    1646),

    cautioned

    against

    the

    overuse of rhetorical orna-

    ments. Baltasar

    Gracian,

    the

    Spanish

    courtier and

    author of

    Agudezay

    arte

    de

    ingenio

    (Huesca, 1649),

    saw wit as an essential

    human

    quality. Peregrini's

    two treatises

    Delle acutezze

    Genoa,

    1639)

    and

    Ifonti dell'ingegno

    ridotti ad arte

    (Bologna,

    1650)

    tried to outline a

    guide

    to the invention of

    witty

    expressions

    that would

    prevent

    the abuse of such

    ornaments.

    Tesauro,

    on

    the

    other

    hand,

    was

    wholeheartedly

    of Marino and

    Graciin's

    persuasion.

    Boschini, too,

    was a

    big

    fan of acutezza. An

    unabashed

    Venetian

    patriot,

    he had a

    tendency

    to

    see Venetian

    quota-

    tions,

    allusions, themes,

    and

    stylistic borrowings

    in

    every-

    thing,

    but

    he was

    not

    alone. With the neo-Venetian

    revival

    of

    the

    early

    seicento,

    artists and critics

    participated

    in

    various

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    15/29

    490

    ART

    BULLETIN SEPTEMBER

    2004

    VOLUME LXXXVI NUMBER 3

    18

    Caravaggio,

    Card

    Sharps,

    oil

    on

    canvas,

    1594. Fort

    Worth,

    Tex.,

    Kimbell

    Art Museum

    (photo:

    @

    2003

    by

    Kimbell Art

    Museum)

    ways in the reinvigoration of Venetian style.70 Standing in

    front

    of Annibale Carracci's

    Assumption,

    Malvasia,

    for

    in-

    stance,

    commented that

    Annibale "looked at Tintoretto"

    in

    order to

    paint

    his

    altarpiece,

    but that when it came to "the

    more learned and

    magnificent drapery

    folds,"

    Annibale

    "sought

    out

    Veronese."71

    "Venetianness" became

    increasingly

    popular,

    and with this

    change

    in

    taste a

    sensitivity

    for such

    repetition

    also became more

    widespread.

    The

    two

    objects

    of

    repetition

    in

    Malvasia's

    passage-Tin-

    toretto's

    style

    and Veronese's folds-also

    provide

    a

    good

    distinction

    between

    following

    another artist's

    style

    (maniera)

    as

    opposed

    to

    repeating

    an actual

    figure

    or

    iconographic type

    (figura,

    concetto)

    rom a

    painting. Figure

    and

    concetti,

    however,

    were sometimes

    conflated

    with

    maniera.

    One

    example

    of this

    slip

    is the association of

    half-length

    male

    portraits

    as a

    quint-

    essentially Giorgionesque

    referent.

    Looking

    at

    Caravaggio's

    Card

    Sharps (Fig.

    18),

    both Baldinucci

    and Bellori described

    it as an imitation of

    Giorgione's "pure" style

    ("modo

    d'inventare

    schietto";

    "schietta

    maniera").72

    Likewise,

    Pietro

    della Vecchia's soldier

    portraits (Fig.

    19)

    were considered as

    Giorgionesque

    "extractions

    [astratti],"

    and the seicento Ve-

    netian

    painter

    was even called

    Giorgione's

    "twin

    [gemello]."

    3

    Baldinucci and Bellori

    were

    probably looking

    at the Del

    Monte

    version of the Card

    Sharps

    painted

    for Cardinal

    Francesco del

    Monte

    (or

    a

    variant

    copy

    of

    it);

    Boschini was

    looking

    at one of the

    many

    bravi

    portraits

    for which della

    Vecchia was

    famous.74

    When we look at the paintings of Caravaggio and della

    Vecchia next to each other

    today,

    the

    stylistic

    difference is as

    great

    as

    that between works

    by Andy

    Warhol

    and

    Roy

    Lich-

    tenstein. In both

    Caravaggio

    and della

    Vecchia's

    depictions

    of

    half-length

    male

    figures

    dressed

    in

    fancy

    hats with

    feathers,

    a

    thematic or

    iconographic

    resemblance-that

    is,

    of

    figure

    or

    concetti-is

    evident,

    but the

    style-that

    is,

    the

    technique-is

    intrinsically

    different.

    Caravaggio's

    stark naturalism

    gives way

    to

    della Vecchia's

    painterly

    Venetian

    brushwork;

    Caravag-

    gio's carefully

    studied faces

    dissolve

    in della

    Vecchia's

    sketchy

    physiognomies;

    and

    Caravaggio's

    balanced

    lighting

    melts in

    della Vecchia's

    smoky

    haze.

    19

    Pietro della

    Vecchia,

    Soldier,

    oil on

    canvas,

    ca. 1660.

    Vienna,

    Kunsthistorisches Museum

    In

    spite

    of this remarkable

    stylistic gap,

    viewers

    still

    saw

    Giorgione lurking

    about-Senecan brothers who shared

    their father's features

    in

    different

    ways.

    Did

    the artists

    want

    the viewer to see

    Giorgione

    in

    these

    paintings?

    Did

    these

    artists want the beholder to

    acknowledge

    their

    mastery

    of and

    over the Renaissance master? Both

    painters

    were attentive to

    Giorgione's

    art in their

    own

    practice. Caravaggio,

    as Zuccaro

    and Bellori

    remarked,

    seems to have studied his works in

    Venice or

    elsewhere,

    and della Vecchia was

    responsible

    for

    the

    seventeenth-century

    restoration of

    Giorgione's

    Castel-

    franco

    altarpiece

    and for a number of

    portraits

    that subse-

    quent

    connoisseurs mistook for authentic

    Giorgiones,

    even

    in

    della Vecchia's own

    time.

    Caravaggio

    did not

    directly

    confirm an admiration for the

    Venetian Renaissance

    painter,

    but della Vecchia

    explained

    to

    Boschini that

    he

    had

    made one of these

    Giorgionesque pic-

    tures "off the

    top

    of his head without

    using

    a model and

    without copying from Giorgione" in order to "demonstrate

    his

    knowledge"

    to his

    father-in-law,

    the Flemish

    caravaggista,

    Nicolo

    Renieri.75

    By admitting

    that he

    painted

    it

    "without

    copying

    from

    Giorgione,"

    della

    Vecchia

    nevertheless invoked

    the name of the artist that he believed his viewers would see

    in his

    painting.

    By stating

    that he

    painted

    it in order to

    "demonstrate his

    knowledge,"

    della Vecchia seems to

    suggest

    that he

    hoped

    his viewer would

    recognize his-namely,

    della

    Vecchia's-virtuosity precisely

    in his

    ability

    to

    paint

    like an-

    other.

    In

    some

    paintings,

    this form of

    stylistic repetition operated

    through ambiguous

    allusion to

    maniera,

    gusto,

    intentione, idea,

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    16/29

    ITALIAN

    BAROQUE

    PRACTICE AND THEORY

    491

    figura,

    concetto,

    or a combination of these

    elements,

    which

    viewers

    recognized

    as

    being something

    "old

    in

    substance and

    new

    in

    manner,"

    to

    quote

    Tesauro

    again.

    And viewers did

    make this distinction when

    looking

    at such

    paintings.

    Bos-

    chini,

    for

    example,

    insisted that della Vecchia's

    "imitations"

    were

    not

    mere

    "copies"

    after

    Giorgione

    but were "extracted

    from

    his own

    intellect,"

    underlining

    at once della Vecchia's

    stylistic dexterity

    and individual

    agency.76

    True

    imitation,

    as

    Tesauro

    insisted,

    did not entail

    taking metaphors

    and

    witty

    expressions exactly

    as

    you

    heard or read

    them,

    for "that

    way

    you

    would not be

    praised

    as an imitator but blamed as a

    thief."

    Imitating Praxiteles'"Apollo,

    he

    continued,

    did not

    mean

    literally

    taking

    it from the Cortile Belvedere into one's

    own home but

    "carving

    another

    piece

    of marble to the same

    proportions,

    so

    that

    Praxiteles on

    seeing

    it

    would marvel

    and

    say,

    'This

    Apollo

    is

    mine,

    yet

    it is not

    mine.""'77Again,

    we seem

    to be

    returning

    to the theme of resemblance that is

    encap-

    sulated in the father and

    son,

    or the

    generational trope.

    Boschini claimed that della

    Vecchia's

    bravi

    portraits

    could

    be found in the

    "galleries

    of

    princes

    and

    gentlemen,"

    where

    "the virtue of della Vecchia

    [sto Vechia]

    is masked."

    "Who,"

    Boschini

    concluded,

    "could ask for a more

    beautiful,

    cunning

    device that tricks those

    who

    see his

    canvases?"78

    It

    goes

    with-

    out

    saying

    that Boschini's own acutezza s demonstrated here

    in the

    play

    on Vechia

    (a

    double reference to the artist's name

    and to his intentional

    stylistic

    archaism)

    and on the word tele

    (meaning

    both canvases and

    veils).

    Like

    Boschini,

    who

    says

    one

    thing

    while

    intending

    another,

    della Vecchia's braviwere

    not

    just portraits

    of soldiers but also

    "cunning

    devices

    [in-

    zegno artificial]"

    that

    pleased

    the

    spectator by making

    evident

    that what he saw was not

    necessarily

    the

    only

    thing

    that he

    got.

    Beneath

    the mask of one

    image

    another

    image

    was

    revealed.

    The

    competitive

    paragone

    of authors and artists

    appealed

    to an aesthetic disposition, which looked on a specific work

    of art as a

    physical

    element within a

    larger conceptual

    work

    of art

    produced

    from the mental

    comparison

    and contrast of

    the

    physical object

    on hand

    with

    an entire

    repertoire

    of

    previous

    and similar works.

    Writing

    about Padovanino's ceil-

    ing

    tondo

    in

    the

    Marciana,

    which was

    made to

    replace

    Bat-

    tista Franco's

    destroyed picture,

    Carlo Ridolfi noted that

    Padovanino "alluded to Franco's

    concetto."79

    specific

    work is

    being

    referenced in this

    example,

    and here

    we

    slide from the

    repetition

    of

    style

    in all of its

    ambiguous guises

    to the

    repe-

    tition of

    particular

    motifs and entire

    compositional passages

    tout court.

    With even more

    precision,

    Annibale

    Roncaglia

    at the end

    of the sixteenth century described Titian's Bacchus and Ari-

    adne

    simply

    as "a

    painting

    in

    which

    the

    Laocoon

    is

    painted"

    (referring

    to the bearded

    figure

    with the snakes in the fore-

    ground

    on the

    right).80 Evidently, Roncaglia

    saw Titian's

    figure

    as a

    repetition

    of the central

    figure

    in

    the

    Laoco6n

    group

    and,

    more

    important,

    he

    expected

    his reader to un-

    derstand and also see his reference. In front of

    Van

    Dyck's

    equestrian

    portrait

    of

    King

    Charles I of

    England (Fig.

    20),

    Bellori had no

    problems identifying

    the

    quotation

    therein of

    Titian's

    equestrian

    portrait

    of Charles V

    (Fig. 21).s8

    Likewise,

    in

    referring

    to Rubens as "the new Titian

    [el

    nuevo

    Ticiano],"

    the

    seventeenth-century Spanish poet Lope

    Felix de

    Vega

    was

    20

    Van

    Dyck,

    Equestrian

    Portrait

    of

    Charles

    ,

    oil on

    canvas,

    1638.

    London,

    National

    Gallery

    also

    making

    a direct connection between

    Rubens's lost

    por-

    trait of

    Philip

    IV and its

    Titianesque

    referent.82

    There is an

    interpretative

    a

    priori

    that

    binds

    these isolated

    examples together.

    I allude to the

    expectation

    of an

    in-

    formed

    audience whose members share

    a common knowl-

    edge

    of the visual codes

    and references

    called into

    play.

    Pallavicino

    explained

    in his seicento treatise on acutezza that

    "admissable

    witty

    remarks

    produce

    wonderment

    by showing

    the

    contrary

    to what is

    expected,

    the different from what

    is

    expected,

    or

    the

    astonishing despite

    it

    being

    nonetheless

    expected."83

    In all three

    scenarios,

    acutezzaaddressed itself to

    the listener's

    expectations. Looking

    at works of art

    in this

    manner

    corresponded

    with a

    type

    of aesthetic

    pleasure

    in the

    redundant

    and

    predictable

    and also

    in the redundant and

    unexpected.

    A

    certain notion of

    originality

    as

    repetition,

    therefore,

    can

    be discerned within the

    Baroque

    concept

    of

    acutezza. Originality, in this sense, resided in the way some-

    thing

    was

    presented

    and the

    way

    that mode of

    presentation

    pushed

    the viewer to see

    things

    in a different

    and unantici-

    pated way.

    Consider

    the

    following example:

    when

    Domenichino

    painted

    a

    picture

    of the

    expulsion

    of Adam and Eve

    (Fig.

    22),

    he

    clearly

    recast

    Michelangelo's

    Divine

    Father from the Sis-

    tine

    ceiling

    (Fig.

    11)

    in

    a new role as

    Adam's

    judge

    rather

    than as Adam's creator. The obvious

    allusion could

    not have

    been lost on the

    erudite Roman audience for whom

    Dome-

    nichino

    (or

    another

    artist)

    repainted

    this

    image

    several

    times.84 The numerous

    replicative

    versions

    document

    the

  • 8/10/2019 Maria Loh - New and Improved: Repetition as Originality in Italian Baroque Practice and Theory

    17/29

    492

    ART

    BULLETIN SEPTEMBER

    2004 VOLUME LXXXVI NUMBER 3

    21

    Titian,

    Portrait

    of

    Charles

    V on

    Horseback,

    il on

    canvas,

    1548.

    Madrid,

    Museo del Prado

    existence of a

    particular

    taste for such

    pictures,

    which seem

    to

    have been

    appreciated precisely

    because

    they

    were

    pas-

    tiches of well-known

    images.85

    Domenichino's own

    imagery,

    too,

    was

    subjected

    to unau-

    thorized

    repetition.

    In a

    painting

    (questionably)

    attributed to

    Carlo

    Maratti,

    the artist reused the bold

    reclining nymph

    in

    the

    foreground

    of

    Domenichino's Diana and the

    Nymphs

    as an

    unlikely

    model for the

    virtuous Susanna

    (Figs.

    23,

    24).86

    In

    Domenichino's

    painting,

    the

    nymph

    is

    but a minor character

    within

    the

    larger

    tale of Diana

    and her numerous

    nymphs.

    She

    looks out at the

    spectator

    while

    reclining

    in a shallow

    pool

    of water with another

    nymph

    at her side. In the

    alleged

    Maratti

    painting,

    on the other

    hand,

    she is the main charac-

    ter. With the

    composition cropped,

    her

    intense

    gaze

    becomes

    more

    emphatic.

    Her nude

    body

    is

    highlighted against

    the

    dark

    shadows of the

    grove,

    where the two elders

    peer

    through

    a

    space

    in

    the trees to

    the left. The

    composition gives

    the

    effect of looking at Domenichino's Diana through a telescope

    and

    glimpsing

    instead Maratti's

    surprising

    twist on Domeni-

    chino's concetto.

    From these

    examples

    we

    might

    draw several conclusions.

    First,

    a

    witty

    paint