3: A Tale of Two Davids, with Bernini and Michelangelo [pic heavy]
[At left] Michelangelo Buonarroti
David (commonly 'The David'), 1504Marble sculpture, approx. h517 cm (204", or 17')
Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence, Italy
[At right] Gian Lorenzo Bernini
David, 1624
Marble sculpture, approx. h170 cm (67", or 5' 7")
Galleria Borghese, Rome, Italy
Yesterday mentioned the idea of a 'viewing tunnel', which is about as broad a viewing space as a 2D work can usually allow. But today, upping the game with sculpture, which provides 360 degrees of viewing angles when in the round and thus makes things significantly more complicated.
So looking at two versions of the David1, one absurdly famous and the other much less so but still one of my favorite sculptures. And since we're comparing approaches to viewer placement this week, have to give a better idea of what these are like in person. So incoming flock of pictures (with a me for scale in the first two):
From below/closer up:
Also, here's a really neat look at how Michelangelo's David was originally intended to be viewed, per his commission2:
(NOTE: I can't in good conscience add more photos at this point, but I encourage you to go look up detail shots and just pore over these things [you can do a search for 'Bernini David' or 'Michelangelo David', it'll pop right up].)
SO. The differences here are pretty stark, and I don't think you need anyone to explain how these viewing experiences might differ. When you walk yourself through them, if you want to keep to the current theme just ask yourself where You The Viewer have been 'placed' relative to each of them. Are you on the scene with David, or are you an invisible omniscient observer? Are you brought in intimately, held at a distance, or some combo? Etc.
What I do want to briefly draw attention to is just that A) scale is a whopping powerful lever for controlling the position of the viewer relative to the artwork, and B) sculpture, being three-dimensional like (we hope) all humans are, ALWAYS has to be considered from a 'how is this relating to my space' perspective: such consideration is actually mutually expected by/from both viewer and artist. In fact, you know those early minimalist sculptures that are are just free-standing rectangles and big cubes and stuff (which statistically speaking you hate)? A lot of that stuff was/is designed to specifically mess with humans' automatic psychological (sometimes physiological) responses to objects that are human-sized, or *just* larger than us, or which correspond to common human-scale environments — basically they're playing off that long-standing expectation of space/scale consideration, and trust that the viewer will pick up on the commentary. You still don't have to like it, but the more you know!
NOTES:
1. If you somehow don't know the David and Goliath story you can read it here, and a little more context on the overall story of David here.
P.S. - That second link goes to a Jewish site, and 15th/17th century Italians were Catholic/Christian, but it's the easiest-to-read write-up of David's life, and the biography is largely affirmed by both religions. For more on the unique role David plays in Christianity, you can click here, but short story is that he's like the pre-Christ, the one whose life is seen to have foreshadowed the messiah's.
And P.P.S. - The reason the biography is shared: Jews also believe that David's life is a foreshadowing of the messiah, they just don't believe the messiah has come yet. So same understanding up through David historically, just a whole mess of symbolism differences once we get to the way David is tied together with Jesus in Christian art.
2. More about Michelangelo's David...
3. ...and more about Bernini's.
4. The commissioners themselves voted to put it outside the Palazzo Signoria, the Florentine seat of government, upon its completion, so FWIW its entire public history of viewing has still been more or less from the viewing angle people have now.
ADDITIONAL NOTE:
I am a respectable(ish) person, and this is a family-friendly blog (for a given definition of 'family'), but I can't bring up Michelangelo's David and not comment on the genitals. So two things.
1. You will notice that while most features on this statue are exaggeratedly large, the junk is quite tiny. I will direct you to a favorite art historian's blog for a brisk, delightful rundown of why that may be. (It's thought that the rest of the features may also have been sized up to be 'read' properly when seen from the original viewing angle, i.e. when it would have been placed on the cathedral roof.)
2. You will also notice that the junk ends up rather prominent in most photos of the statue, unless they're specifically close-ups on the hands, head or feet. That's perfectly understandable when you think about it, given the viewing angle, the pose, and how central the penis is on the male anatomy, but it's actually pretty funny howhard difficult it is to get a photo of the sculpture without the private parts. Story time: the first time I got to see the David, it was as a high school senior with a couple other high school seniors, and the museum's stance on picture-taking was much harsher than it is now, no photos at all. But one of the two I was with had come all this way and really wanted a picture of the David in person, so he tried to tilt his phone out of his jeans pocket, snap some photos without looking, and hope for the best. Apparently David's head is further up than you'd think, because he walked out with pictures of nothing but the junk, just from all angles and with various levels of zoom.
So looking at two versions of the David1, one absurdly famous and the other much less so but still one of my favorite sculptures. And since we're comparing approaches to viewer placement this week, have to give a better idea of what these are like in person. So incoming flock of pictures (with a me for scale in the first two):
Also, here's a really neat look at how Michelangelo's David was originally intended to be viewed, per his commission2:
(NOTE: I can't in good conscience add more photos at this point, but I encourage you to go look up detail shots and just pore over these things [you can do a search for 'Bernini David' or 'Michelangelo David', it'll pop right up].)
SO. The differences here are pretty stark, and I don't think you need anyone to explain how these viewing experiences might differ. When you walk yourself through them, if you want to keep to the current theme just ask yourself where You The Viewer have been 'placed' relative to each of them. Are you on the scene with David, or are you an invisible omniscient observer? Are you brought in intimately, held at a distance, or some combo? Etc.
What I do want to briefly draw attention to is just that A) scale is a whopping powerful lever for controlling the position of the viewer relative to the artwork, and B) sculpture, being three-dimensional like (we hope) all humans are, ALWAYS has to be considered from a 'how is this relating to my space' perspective: such consideration is actually mutually expected by/from both viewer and artist. In fact, you know those early minimalist sculptures that are are just free-standing rectangles and big cubes and stuff (which statistically speaking you hate)? A lot of that stuff was/is designed to specifically mess with humans' automatic psychological (sometimes physiological) responses to objects that are human-sized, or *just* larger than us, or which correspond to common human-scale environments — basically they're playing off that long-standing expectation of space/scale consideration, and trust that the viewer will pick up on the commentary. You still don't have to like it, but the more you know!
NOTES:
1. If you somehow don't know the David and Goliath story you can read it here, and a little more context on the overall story of David here.
P.S. - That second link goes to a Jewish site, and 15th/17th century Italians were Catholic/Christian, but it's the easiest-to-read write-up of David's life, and the biography is largely affirmed by both religions. For more on the unique role David plays in Christianity, you can click here, but short story is that he's like the pre-Christ, the one whose life is seen to have foreshadowed the messiah's.
And P.P.S. - The reason the biography is shared: Jews also believe that David's life is a foreshadowing of the messiah, they just don't believe the messiah has come yet. So same understanding up through David historically, just a whole mess of symbolism differences once we get to the way David is tied together with Jesus in Christian art.
2. More about Michelangelo's David...
3. ...and more about Bernini's.
4. The commissioners themselves voted to put it outside the Palazzo Signoria, the Florentine seat of government, upon its completion, so FWIW its entire public history of viewing has still been more or less from the viewing angle people have now.
ADDITIONAL NOTE:
I am a respectable(ish) person, and this is a family-friendly blog (for a given definition of 'family'), but I can't bring up Michelangelo's David and not comment on the genitals. So two things.
1. You will notice that while most features on this statue are exaggeratedly large, the junk is quite tiny. I will direct you to a favorite art historian's blog for a brisk, delightful rundown of why that may be. (It's thought that the rest of the features may also have been sized up to be 'read' properly when seen from the original viewing angle, i.e. when it would have been placed on the cathedral roof.)
2. You will also notice that the junk ends up rather prominent in most photos of the statue, unless they're specifically close-ups on the hands, head or feet. That's perfectly understandable when you think about it, given the viewing angle, the pose, and how central the penis is on the male anatomy, but it's actually pretty funny how